PENN Y-WISE
The Official Publication of Early American Coppers, Inc.
Volume LITI Number 4
List of Club Officials
Introduction by the Editor
Original Articles
Bill Eckberg
Conly Reider
Mike Packard
Ed Fuhrman
Jack D. Young
Getting Back to the Basics
Ray Rouse
Meetings and Membership Notes
Bill Eckberg
Carol Consolo
Carol Consolo
Dennis Fuoss
Chris F. Pretsch and Tom Nist
Bim Gander
Miscellaneous Collector Notes
Bob Fagaly
Ken Laymont
Frank Ferland
Bill Eckberg
Howard Spencer Pitkow
David Tortorice
Hugh Bodell
Letter to the Editor
Swaps and Sales
162
163
164
170
73
178
180
183
186
187
188
189
190
190
19]
192
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
200
Ise’
October 2019
Consecutive Issue #298
Copyright 2019 Early American Coppers, Inc. All Rights Reserved
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction by the Editor: Owned By History
The Liberty Cap Cent Heads, 1793-1796
A Simple, Compact Setup for Photographing Slabbed Coins in High
Resolution
“Let Us at Least Agree...” I Can’t
Unraveling the Mystery of a Mint Error
Counterfeit Coin of the Week — 1806 “C-1” Half Cent
American Hard Times Tokens
President’s Letter — Camaraderie
Minutes of the 2019 ANA/EAC Meeting
Region 5 EAC Meeting
Region 7 EAC Meeting
Save the Dates for Future EAC Conventions
EAC Members Win Awards at ANA
EAC 2020 Preview
EAC Publications Committee
Candidates for Membership
DANSCO Large Cent Decoder Ring
My Story
Penny Candy — Or, How I Started Collecting Coins
Strawberry Leaves Forever
Hodgepodge 1: Finding an 1803 S-264 (R4+) and 1806 C-3 (R6)
My First EAC Convention
Advice for New Members Part 6: What to Collect After You Have a
Date Set
CLUB OFFICIALS
National Officers
President: Bill Eckberg (halfcent@icloud.com)
PO Box 222338, West Palm Beach, FL 33422 (703)577-7066
Vice President: Emily Matuska (rmatuska@roadrunner.com)
PO Box 2111, Heath, OH 43056
Secretary: Donna Levin (levindonna@att.net)
PO Box 32115, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33420
Treasurer: Lou Alfonso (loualfonso1794@gmail.com)
PO Box 480188, Delray Beach, FL 33448
Editor of Penny-Wise: Harry E. Salyards (hpsalyar@tcgcs.com)
PO Box 1691 Hastings, NE 68902
National Positions
Membership Chairman: Bim Gander (bimgander@gmail.com)
12770 NW Steelhead Falls Drive, Terrebonne, OR 97760
Historian: Mark Borckardt (markb@heritagegalleries.com)
1625 Warm Springs Dr., Allen, TX 75002
Sunshine Committee: David Consolo (dbconsolo@sbcglobal.net)
589 Mock Orange Circle, Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023
Regional Chairs and Secretaries
Region 1: New England:
Chairman: Howard Barron (halfcent68@gmail.com)
Secretary: George Trostel (GGus24@sbcglobal.net)
Region 2: New York-New Jersey:
Chairman: Glenn Marx (GMari@aol.com)
Secretary: Greg Heim (Gsheim 1 (@verizon.net)
Region 3: Mid-Atlantic (PA, DE, MD, DC, VA, WV, NC)
Chairman: Greg Fitzgibbon (FitzgG1@aol.com)
Secretary: Ed Fox (edfox@fox-engineering.com)
Region 4: Southeast (SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, TN)
Chairman: Grady Frisby (frisbyco@yahoo.com)
Secretary: Denis Loring (DWLoring@aol.com)
Region 5: North Central (MI, OH, KY, IN, IL, WI, MN, IA, NE, SD, ND)
Chairman: Terry Denman (tsdenman@yahoo.com)
Secretary: Carol Consolo (dbconsolo@sbcglobal.net)
Region 6: South Central (KS, MO, AR, LA, TX, OK, NM, CO)
Chairman: Russ Butcher (mrbb1794@sbcglobal.net)
Secretary: Steve Carr (scarr4002@everestkc.net)
Region 7: West (WY, MT, ID, UT, NV, AZ, CA, OR, WA, AK, HI)
Chairman: Ron Shintaku (b737pic@yahoo.com)
Secretary: Dennis Fuoss (dfuoss92192@yahoo.com)
Region 8: Internet
Chairman: Matt Yohe (region8@eacs.org)
Webmaster: Joe Pargola (joe@pargola.com)
The Board of Governors is composed of the 5 National Officers and the 8 Regional Chairs.
Penny-Wise has been published regularly since September 1967. Its founding editor was Warren A. Lapp (1915-
1993). Harry E. Salyards has served as Editor-in-Chief since 1986. Contributing Editors: Denis W. Loring, John
D. Wright and William R. Eckberg.
Printed by Advance Graphics and Printing, Chandler, OK
INTRODUCTION BY THE EDITOR: OWNED BY HISTORY
Harry E. Salyards
In his poignant introduction to the recent sale of his
middle date cents, EAC’er John Piyewski spoke of how
he had “tried to own history” in assembling his collec-
tion, “large cents [that] had just enough wear to show
they’d experienced life, but not too much to be damaged
by it.”
Is there any better way to describe the attraction of a
lightly circulated copper coin? I doubt it. But beyond
the purely numismatic appeal—and the attractive prices,
compared to fully mint state coins—there’s the matter
of aspiring to own history. If true collector numismatics
is to survive, it is that aspiration to which we should be
directing our encouragement.
Instead, the release of W-mintmarked quarters into
circulation is getting all the press. Just like putting
scarce dates and mintmarks into circulation for Nation-
al Coin Week, the motivation here is neither historic,
nor particularly numismatic, but “Getting Something
for Nothing.” And it’s doomed to failure. That motiva-
tion worked in, say, 1959—with a half century worth
of “better” dates and mintmarks, in a// denominations,
available for face value in circulation. Today, the odds
are overwhelmingly against a would-be collector find-
ing anything of interest. Consider the story of the recent
letter writer to Coin World, who ordered 1000 dollars’
worth of half dollars from his bank, to search the rolled
coins for treasures, and ended up with one 40% silver
1965, and 1999 clad coins.
Pll grant you—it may work to get people to look at
their change. 60 years on, I still do—TI even got an es-
sentially Uncirculated 1962 cent in change a couple of
weeks ago. Its condition speaks to the declining useful-
ness of cents as money. In 1959, the oldest coins I found
in circulation were the two 1909 varieties of Philadel-
phia Lincoln cents. Reflecting their 50 years of useful-
ness, they were each worn down to the G-VG range.
Today, the U.S. cent is a total anachronism. Except in
ageregates of say 25, it can purchase nothing. A good
part of the mystique of collecting from circulation, back
in the late 1950s and early 1960s, was the disconnect
between face value and collector value of any given coin
received in change. A cent wasn’t necessarily a cent, and
a nickel wasn’t necessarily a nickel; even if not a great
rarity, any given piece might be worth a quarter, or even
a dollar. Today, except for extremely rare instances, like
finding a 1969-S double die Lincoln cent in circulation,
each cent is worth a cent. And that cent is worthless.
Furthermore, all evidence suggests that we are headed
toward a coinless society. What will happen to popular
American numismatics when newly minted coins disap-
pear altogether? What will be the attraction of an “old
coin” if you don’t have a new coin for a frame of refer-
ence? When I was a kid, the attraction of Indian Head
cents was that they were what had gone before. And of
course, large cents and half cents had gone even farther
before. Starting from the wealth of different coins avail-
able in pocket change, the progression from collect-
ing newer to progressively older types carried a sense
of inevitability. The very dates on those coins became
evocative. “1907” became more than the most plentiful
Indian Head cent; it spoke for the world reflected in the
wedding photographs of my grandparents. History thus
exists on two levels: in the written distillation of events,
as interpreted in turn by each generation of public histo-
rians; and in privately held artifacts, like old coins and
photographs.
Numismatic artifacts, like old coppers, offer an open
invitation through the dates recorded on them. Each
date is a doorway, offering us an opening into the world
of its birth. Through that door, we are invited to uncover
not just the wealth of numismatic details inherent in any
coin of that year, but a tangible connection to that year
itself. The coin becomes primary source material, the
exceptional survivor from a long-forgotten world, and
we become the historians who aspire to parse out its eco-
nomic and social meaning. As collectors, we may start
by aspiring to own history. But the deeper we pursue the
journey, we more we come to find history owning us.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK KK KK KK OK
163
THE LIBERTY CAP CENT HEADS, 1793-1796
Bill Eckberg
There has been considerable debate over the years
about how the earliest U.S. cents were made. Sheldon
believed all dies from 1793 and 1794 to have been indi-
vidually hand engraved’. As recently as 1998’, Kleeberg
believed hubs were not introduced until at least 1795.
Breen credited “a dream” for his recognition that the
Heads of ‘94 were produced from hubs’.
Had the earlier authors consulted a professional en-
graver, they would have learned that the time required to
produce a die for an obverse made it impractical for the
U.S. Mint to engrave them by hand. Henry Voigt created
the obverses for the Chain cents that way, but it took so
long (nearly a week per obverse die and a day per reverse
die) that it would have taken him longer to produce the
four obverse dies than they lasted in press. Obvously, in-
efficiency like that could not continue. Therefore, Voigt
produced hubs for the heads on the Wreath and Liberty
Cap cents and half cents of 1793%.
There is some controversy over the number of “dif-
ferent heads” used in 1794. Chapman’, believing that all
dies were individually engraved, described the gradual
development of six styles: the Head of ‘93 (S-17-20),
an “entirely different style” (S-21-42), smaller and nar-
rower heads (S-41-51), larger heads (S-54-63), heads in
highest relief (S-52-53 and 64-66), and “a hard, inartis-
tic style, as continued in 1795” (S-67-72). Breen, recog-
nizing that hubs/device punches were used, described
five hubs used in 1794: Head of ‘93 (S-17-20), “First
Scott Head” (S-21-40), “Second Scott Head (S-41-66),
“First Gardner Head” (S-67-71) and “Second Gardner
Head” (S-72).
Robert Scot was hired as engraver late in 1793. After
a brief reuse of Voigt’s 1793 obverse hub in 1794, the
remaining cents coined that year have a markedly differ-
ent treatment to the hair; the last few also exhibit a low-
er relief to the heads, comparable to that used in 1795.
Finally, in 1796, another new head appeared. Thus we
1 Sheldon, William H. 1958. Penny Whimsy. Harper &
Brothers, New York
2 Kleeberg, John. 1998. The Strawberry Leaf cent: a reap-
praisal. In: Coinage of the Americas Conference. Ameri-
ca’s Large Cent. p.35. American Numismatic Society, NY.
3. Breen, Walter. 2000. Walter Breen'’s Encyclopedia of Early
United States Cents 1793-1814. Bowers and Merena Gal-
leries, Wolfeboro, NH
4 Eckberg, Bill. 2017a. Hubbed 1793 obverse dies. Penny-
Wise LI, 65.
5 Chapman, S. Hudson. 1926. The United States Cents of
the Year 1794. Privately published.
have at least four Liberty Cap cent types, known as the
Heads of *93, ‘94, ‘95 and ‘96, that are different enough
to require specific grading information’.
Having examined the half cent obverses and discov-
ered that all of the diverse 1794 half cent obverses were
produced from the same hub’ and that the 1793 obvers-
es were produced from a hub that had been previously
created for the 1792 disme*, I thought it worthwhile to
examine the large cent obverse hubs of the 18 century
using the technique of producing overlays in different
color channels in Photoshop® that I used to determine
that the Wreath obverses were all produced from a sin-
gle hub’. Such a study requires that the images be of
very high quality, the exact same pixel dimensions, and
produced by a single camera setup with consistent light-
ing and axis tilt. Accordingly, I have focused on images
from the Reynolds and Kashkarian sales conducted by
Ira and Larry Goldberg, with photos by Lyle Engleson.
Lyle’s superb photos of these excellent coins meet these
criteria.
Breen, among others, attributed the Head of ’93 to Jo-
seph Wright. This supposition, however, does not stand
up to scrutiny. Despite the possibility that he may have
had a pending recess appointment as engraver, there is
no evidence that Wright did any work for the Mint in
1793'°. The hub for the Head of ‘93 must have been pro-
duced by Voigt, and it must have been created in ear-
ly July, before Wright’s supposed appointment, as the
coins were struck on the 18 and 22" of that month!'.
Voigt’s 1793 half cent hub consisted of Ms. Liberty’s
bust and, possibly, some rudimentary treatment of the
hair. Similarly, his Wreath cent hub had a full treat-
ment of the bust with stylized masses of hair that were
strengthened in each working die. His Liberty Cap cent
hub had a complete bust and cap, and it had stylized
masses of hair, but he did not further develop the hair
on the dies.
6 Eckberg, William R., Robert L. Fagaly, Dennis E. Fuoss
and Raymond J. Williams. 2014. Grading Guide for Early
American Copper Coins. Early American Coppers, Inc.
7 Eckberg, Bill. 2017b. How the half cent dies were made:
1794-1836. Penny-Wise LI, 143.
8 Eckberg, William R. 2017c. Hubbing dies in the earli-
est days of the United States Mint. The Numismatist 130
(June) 52.
9 Eckberg, Bill. 2017a.
10 Eckberg, Bill. 2017d. Did Joseph Wright engrave the
cent Head of ‘93? Penny-Wise LI, 208.
11 Voigt, Henry. 1793. Account Book. Autographic.
164
Overlay of S-14 and S-19. 1793 and 1794 Heads of ‘93.
There is no difference in the hair between the two.
The colors in the images in this article are not true. They
are created by placing greyscale images of the different
obverses in different color channels. Brighter greens
and reds in subsequent images indicate places where the
engraving of the dies differs.
The Head of ‘93 hub produced four dies that were used
to strike coins in 1793 and three more that were used
in 1794. Overlays of high grade examples of S-14 and
S-19 showed that the hub used contained the bust, hair
and cap. There are no significant differences in any of
these features. It is clear from the overlays that the hub
was used in both years with minimal, if any, additional
engraving of the hair. This serves as an important con-
trol for the studies where other obverses are compared,
as it validates the fact that when obverses are alike, the
method shows them to be alike by rendering the features
a relatively uniform color. If there were extra engraving
in the hair of either die, there would be bright red or
green lines where the differential engraving appeared.
It 1s quite possible that the Head of ‘93 dies used in
1794 were produced by Voigt in 1793 but not dated.
However, if so, why were they not used in 1793? The
Mint had almost 40,000 pounds of copper on hand at the
end of the year. Indeed, some of the planchets may have
been produced in 1793, as examples of all four 1794 va-
rieties exist with the obsolete edge lettering from 1793
as well as that used on all of the later 1794s.
The fact that the Head of ‘93 dies lasted such a short
time in the press — the best estimates of the mintages
are 12,756 for 1793” and 11,000 for 1794 — further
suggests that the dies were produced from a similarly
inferior quality of steel and therefore may well have
been made at about the same time, but the last digit (or
12 Dalton, Tristram. 1793. Treasurer of the Mint Receipts
for Copper Coins. Autographic.
165
all) of the date was omitted. The dates of two of the three
1794 Head of ’93 dies are exceptionally sloppy, which is
consistent with their placement by a neophyte.
The cents of 1794 were produced from 37 obverse
dies: three of the Head of ‘93 type, twenty-eight of the
Head of ‘94, and six of the Head of ‘95.
Breen described the Heads of ‘94 as being from two
different hubs that differed in the size of the bust and cap
and details of the eye. Chapman suggested four different
“styles” as described above. Were there multiple “Heads
of £94?” Hubs of that era did not last long, and the pro-
duction of 28 dies from a single hub would certainly be
an outlier. The Wreath hub produced 7 dies, the Head of
‘93 also produced 7; the Head of ‘95 produced 12; final-
ly, the Head of ‘96 produced 6. Similarly, the 1793 half
cent hub produced 3 dies; the 1794 produced 5, and the
1795 produced 7. Two different hubs created the 6 half
dollar obverse dies of 1794 and two more created the 11
of 1795'°. It is therefore reasonable to suggest, as Breen
did, that multiple hubs were used for the Head of 94.
As a further test of the method, I selected the obverses
of S-21 and S-24 as examples of early dies, supposedly
of the same style, but that look noticeably different.
Though the fine engraving of the hair, the fullness of the
cheeks (S-24 is the “Apple Cheek’’* or “Scarred Head”?
variety) and width of the poles differ, all facial features
Overlay of S21 and S24. Heads of ‘94. The hair shows red
and green color indicating some hand-engraving of the
dies. The color in the cheek is due to the differences in the
relief of the dies. S24 is called “Apple Cheek,” and has
very high relief, hence the green and red.
13 Tompkins, Steve M. 2015. Early United States Half Dol-
lars. Volume I. 1795-1807. Privately published.
14 Sheldon, William H. 1958.
15 Maris, Edward. 1870. Varieties of the Copper Issues of
the United States’ Mint in the Year 1794. Second Edition.
Privately published.
and the bust, cap and major hair masses align perfectly.
The two dies are too similar to have been created from
hubs that differed in any significant way. The difference
in the hair detail is not surprising, as Scot used different
treatments of the hair of half cent dies, as well. The
minor differences in the caps can also be explained by
minor touch-up engraving of the dies.
I next tested S-21 against S-57, an example of Breen’s
“second Scot head” and Chapman’s “largest head.”
Again, other than the fine engraving of the hair and
a slight truncation of the nose on the latter, there are
no differences between the heads. Even the caps align
perfectly, debunking Breen’s suggestion that the bust and
cap sizes and eyes differ. Other pairwise comparisons of
Head of ‘94 dies produced similar results. Even odd dies
like the Pyramidal Head (S-57) were obviously created
from a hub that matched that used in early 1794. Thus,
Breen’s notion of “Scot’s Second Head” does not stand
up to scrutiny, nor does Chapman’s notion of several
styles of the Head of ‘94.
Maris gave us a number of fanciful names for the
Heads of ‘94. Some are known by issues with the date
(e.g., Fallen 4, Crooked 7), but others suggest differ-
ences in the heads (e.g., Trephined Head, Young Head).
Others make no sense. He called the same obverse The
Ornate and Nondescript on different varieties! Was
Maris seeing real things, or did his names for the heads
reflect nothing more than an overactive imagination?
Two heads that might be associated with love, Venus
Marina (S-32) and Amatory, later Amiable, Face (S-
30) match beautifully. The extra hair curl due to dou-
Overlay of S-21 and S-57. Heads of ‘94. The latter is
Maris’ “Pyramidal Head” and an example of Chapman’s
largest head and Breen’s Second Scott Head. The shallow
die defects in the right field of S-57 can be seen faintly.
Otherwise, only the hair differs signficantly.
Venus Marina (S-30) overlaid with Amatory Face
(Amiable Face, S-32). The double-punched lowest hair
curl of S-30 shows clearly, but do you see anything in the
faces that would lead to their different nicknames?
ble punching at the bottom of S-30 shows green in the
overlay, but the faces look equally lovable. Two vari-
eties that might be associated with unusually different
hair, Abrupt Hair (S-41) and Many Haired (S-59) do,
in fact, show differences in the hair, though no more so
than other pairs of dies. Overlay of Short Bust (S-44)
and Patagonian (S-60) reveals minor differences in the
hair with the lowest curl cut off in the former, but the
heads are, once again, the same. We must conclude that
Maris had an overactive imagination, and many things
he thought he saw in the dies lack a basis in reality.
The next question to be addressed was to what extent
do the hubs of 1793 and 1794 differ? The hubs were
created by different engravers, and the resulting coins
look quite different, but how much of that is due to
the treatment of the hair? I overlaid S-19 and S-21.
Abrupt Hair (S-41) overlaid with Many Haired (S-59).
There is very little difference between these dies.
166
Short Bust (S-44) overlaid with Patagonian (S-60). The
lowest hair locks are longer on the latter, but the S44 bust
is not shortened.
Surprisingly, the overlays show that the similarity in the
busts 1s quite remarkable, especially considering they
were supposedly designed and cut by different people.
All aspects of the face, including the eye, ear, nose, lips
and chin, matched perfectly, as did the neck and bust
lines, and cap. There is, of course, much more detail in
the hair in the 1794, as shown by the many red strands,
but otherwise they are difficult to tell apart.
Either Scot, who had no previous experience at cre-
ating coinage dies, was extraordinarily accurate at
precisely copying small, engraved, three dimensional
structures, or else he used Voigt’s hub to punch in a new
master die that he then modified in Ms Liberty’s hair
and from which multiple working dies were ultimately
created with additional hand engraving of her hair. It is
Overlay of S-19 and S-21. Heads of ‘93 and ‘94,
respectively. The busts and caps match perfectly, but the
hair is markedly different.
impossible to do more than speculate about which of
these possibilities 1s correct, but 1t would appear that the
Head of ‘94 was developed directly from the ‘93 hub,
and the latter was not merely used as a design model. It
is certainly not “entirely different” from the other type.
Taxay and Breen speculated that the Head of ‘95 was
by John Smith Gardner, but Gardner claimed to have
created no master dies'®. Accordingly, I attribute the
Head of ‘95 to Scot. It 1s in lower relief than that of
‘94. We might, therefore, expect that the hub differs
materially from that of 1794. In fact, overlays of the
heads of ‘93 and ‘94 with ‘95 show great similarity,
though the similarity with the Head of ‘93 1s even better.
Overlay of S-19 and S-76. Heads of ‘93 and ‘95. The
match is exceptional, so the Head of ‘95 could have been
derived directly from the hub of ‘93.
1
ts oz, ate * =
th ” a
Bh 1s ee
Overlay of S-60 and S-76. Heads of ‘94 and ‘95. The
match is good between the heads and caps, but very dif-
ferent between the hair and bust lines.
16 Stewart, Frank H. 1924. History of the first United States
Mint, its People and its Operations. Privately printed.
167
Bust lines of the Head of ‘95 (green at upper arrow) and
those of ‘93, ‘94 and ‘96 (red at lower arrow).
The eye, ear, nose, mouth, forehead and chin align very
well. The main differences are that the bust line of ‘95 is
higher, and the hair is much more detailed on the Head
of ‘94. These hubs were obviously designed on the same
plan but an earlier bust hub lacking the pole (Z.e., that of
1793) must have been used as the basis of the master
die used for the Heads of ’95.
Breen described the Heads of ‘95 as being “Gardner’s
first” and “Gardner’s second” heads, which implies that
they are the products of different master dies. However,
comparing the S-67 and S-76 obverses by this method
shows that they are unquestionably derived from the
same hub, with little extra engraving. Though Breen de-
scribes the S-72 as being the only “Exact Head of ‘95,”
he agrees that it 1s from the same hub that created S-67-
71. The results here absolutely confirm this conclusion.
Assuming that the initial hub was raised from a master
die as Scot described, the lowest curl must have broken
off in the hub. We might then ask why a new hub was
Overlay of S-67 and S-76. Heads of ‘95. Otheer than
minor retouching, there is no difference between the
heads. The lowest curl is broken off on the S-76.
not raised with the curl intact? The answer would seem
to be that the difference was considered insignificant.
Seven dies were produced from it after the curl broke
off.
Of course, that raises the question of why an entirely
new master die and hub were created to produce only
six obverses in 1796? Perhaps the expectation was that
Liberty Caps would be struck throughout the year rath-
er than the change to the Draped Bust design that took
place in the fall, or perhaps the 1795 master die and/or
hub had deteriorated and were no longer serviceable.
For whatever reason, Scot created a new hub in 1796.
This hub created only six dies that struck coins, as
the design was changed to the Draped Bust in July of
that year. I compared it to the 1793 and ‘95 hubs. The
Overlay of S-77 and S-86. Heads of ‘95 and ‘96,
respectively. The match is very good, but not perfect.
ny ot”
ee
Overlay of S-19 and S-86. Heads of ‘93 and ‘96,
respectively. The match is extremely close for the busts
and caps. The thin green lines represent individual hairs
engraved in the Head of ‘96 but not in that of ‘93.
168
primary difference is that the head is in slightly higher
relief than the ‘95. The most obvious differences from
the Head of ‘95 are that the bust is more pointed (like
that of ‘93), the lips are slightly open, the eye is more
open, the tip of the cap is higher and more rounded, and
the jawline is lower behind the chin (all but the lips like
the Head of ‘93).
The results of this study show that Chapman’s 1794
Styles 2-5 were, in fact, created from identical hubs,
as were Breen’s First and Second Scot Heads, as also
were his First and Second Gardner Heads. Furthermore,
though Robert Scot certainly put his own stamp on the
coins (to create a metaphor), he did not reinvent the
design for the Liberty Cap cents. Rather, he took Voigt’s
original design and made minor edits to it. Did he think
his versions were better than Voigt’s, or did he just want
to make it clear that someone new was in charge? We
can only speculate about his motives, but we now know
that his contribution built directly on Voigt’s original.
It seems certain that Scot used Voigt’s 1793 hub
directly to create his 1794-96 hubs, but why would he do
that? While we can’t get directly into his head, we can
consider other information. The first thing to consider is
that, while Scot had engraved plates for currency, book
illustrations, maps, seal dies, a very primitive-looking
Indian Peace medal from 1780, and probably even the
Great Seal of the United States, he had no experience
creating coinage dies when he became Engraver at the
Mint!'’. It would, therfore, make good sense for him
to work with what was already on hand as much as
possible. By 1795, Scot was working on master dies for
gold and silver coinages and even a new design for half
cents, so it would make sense for him to reuse Voigt’s
original model as long as he could. The results of this
study indicate that he did so, with minor modification,
through the first half of 1796, at which point he changed
the cent coinage to the Draped Bust design that he had
first used on dollar coins the previous year.
And, of course, the Head of ‘93 was already a very
lovely design!
Voigt’s 1793 hub is thus in every way the origin of all
of the dies of the Liberty Cap cents. It was apparently
used directly to produce the master die for the the Head
of ‘94 and quite probably also those of ‘95 and ‘96. I
have reconstructed it based on the finest examples that
survive from it. It consisted of the entire bust with the
hair and the cap. It did not contain the pole. To create
the hub of 1794, all that was needed was to impress the
‘93 hub into steel, perform additional engraving in the
17 Nyberg, William F. 2015. Robert Scot. Engraving Lib-
erty. American History Press, Staunton, VA.
Recreation of Henry Voigt’s Hub for the Head of ‘93. It
contains the head and cap, but not the pole.
hair, and add a pole. To create the 1795 hub, it could
have been punched in a bit more weakly to reduce the
relief and therefore the pressure needed to strike up the
coins. Perhaps the hair had been reduced by grinding the
hub. A pole was not added. Finally, it could have been
used to create the Head of ‘96 with very minor modifi-
cations beyond the extra engraving of the hair. For the
many who are fans of the Head of ‘93, it now assumes
even more significance in the history of the Liberty Cap
cents, and we see that an even greater debt is owed to its
creator, Henry Voigt, than had been supposed.
We cannot state with certainty exactly how many hubs
Scot used in 1794. Was it even possible that one hub
created 28 working dies? However, we do know that if
there were multiple hubs, they were identical, as far as
early 21“ century imaging technology can determine.
It is remarkable that differences in the treatment of the
hair on the working dies confused matters so thoroughly
for over two hundred years, making experts imagine the
existence of multiple different hubs that never existed
or worse, that all of the dies were individually hand en-
graved!
Breen gets credit for a final observation, which is fur-
ther proved by this study. “Collectors hitherto have been
more interested in the differences among varieties than
in the similarities; and they have not realized how much
can be learned from the latter'®.” Or, to quote the great
American numismatist, Yogi Berra, “You can observe a
lot by just watching.”
18 Breen, Walter. 1984. Robert Scot’s earliest device punch-
es. In Coinage of the Americas Conference. America
Copper Coinage 1783-1857. p. 9. American Numismatic
Society, New York.
169
A SIMPLE COMPACT SETUP FOR PHOTOGRAPHING SLABBED COINS IN HIGH
RESOLUTION
Conly Rieder
In arecent (July 2019) Penny-Wise article Hugh Bodell
provided nine pieces of wise advice for new EAC mem-
bers, and numismatists in general. His last recommen-
dation, which he felt was of greatest importance, was:
“when you have enough coins to protect, put them in a
safe deposit box at your bank! The annual charge will
be much less than insuring your set—just get used to not
having your coins at home.”
My best coins do, indeed, reside in a bank safety de-
posit box. As a result, when the spontaneous call for
“lets view some coins” comes I rely on high resolu-
tion photographs, and the more accurate the image the
more useful it is. In addition to personal pleasure, high-
quality true-to-life images are also useful when selling
(and buying) coins via the internet, e.g., through ebay,
auction houses and numismatic websites. Some sellers
do a good job of photographing their wares, sometimes
even sacrificing aesthetics to depict the coin’s condition
accurately. However, in my experience, the image often
Fig. 1. The same 1849 Half Cent (PCGS MS64 BN CAC) photographed, respective-
ly (L-R), by Stacks/Bowers, Heritage and me.
fails to match what the coin really looks like accurately:
it appears flat, excessively bright or dark, and/or even
the wrong color(s) (Figs 1,2).
One often overlooked issue is that the “color” of a coin
seen through the camera lens and captured on film (or a
chip) will be defined by the quality and Kelvin tempera-
ture of the light used to photograph it (detailed below).
Furthermore, like porcelain (my wife is a ceramic art-
ist), copper, silver and gold are highly reflective, and can
tone multiple colors (which depend on the “thickness”
of the oxide deposit as well as the angle of view rela-
tive to the light source), making it difficult to capture/
represent their luster (or lack thereof) and surface char-
acteristics accurately.
Through the years, I’ve tried various approaches to
capture images of my coins which look, to my eyes,
like my coins, even under a 10X loupe. In this article,
I describe a simple, inexpensive photographic system
that I now routinely use for slabbed coins. It’s quick to
assemble and tear down, and it takes advantage of the
facts that: 1) modern, inexpensive digital cameras allow
a captured image to be viewed, saved or deleted almost
instantaneously without the need or cost of developing
film and printing the image; 2) the ratio between the
maximum (white) and minimum (black) measurable/de-
tectable light intensities (i.e., the dynamic range) of dig-
ital imaging 1s now equal to or better than film (and the
eye); 3) inexpensive LED lamps/lights can now closely
replicate the Kelvin temperature (~5600°) of sun light
(i.e., natural “white” light or daylight); and 4) high qual-
ity image processing programs are available that can be
used to correct minor mistakes and adjust the histogram
of the original raw digital image until it really does look
to the eye like the coin in question.
= There is an old saying in high
\ resolution imaging (as well as
in computer science): “garbage
| in, garbage out”. In our case this
| means that it is not possible to
/ obtain accurate, realistic and
/. satisfying pictures of a slabbed
coin if the slab that holds it 1s
~ scratched, scuffed or otherwise
marred across the viewing sur-
face, which is often the case
Fig. 2. An 1842 N1 Small Date Large cent NGC MS65
brown (top of the census). The sales image by Heritage
is on the left, while mine is on the right. Note that the
Heritage image is marred by scratches and scuff at the 12
o-clock position on the slab that are lacking in mine. My
image also looks like the coin I have, while the Heritage
image contains too much “red” (making it darker).
170
(e.g., Fig 1, middle; Fig 2). To mitigate this issue, before
photographing a coin I use Slab-Renew (http://www.
slabrenew.com/home.html) to remove any debris or
scratches from the slab surface covering the coin. I then
store each slab individually in Intercept boxes (http://
www.interceptshield.com/boxes.html) for protection
against future scratches.
Other considerations are relevant in modern digital
imaging. For example, although few do so, it 1s impor-
tant to calibrate the monitor you use to a known/defined
standard routinely. This ensures that the colors and
black levels seen on your monitor are true, and that it is
displaying the best results for editing and viewing 1m-
ages. At the same time, it allows the density and color
of each image to look relatively the same on different
(calibrated) monitors, and between monitors and prints
(see https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/how-to-
calibrate-your-monitor/).
In a digital greyscale image, each pixel is represented
by a defined number of bits, often 8. Each 8-bit pixel
can have one of 256 tonal values---from black (0) or
white (255) to any of the intermediate 254 shades of
gray. While the number of pixels defines the height and
width of an image, the bits defining each pixel describe
how light or dark each pixel is (i.e., the bit depth). An
8-bit RGB (red/green/blue) color image consists of three
8-bit grayscale images, one representing shades of red,
one of green, and the other of blue. All colors are gener-
ated by combining these primary colors. As a result, an
8-bit RGB image can contain any of 16.7 million unique
color definitions (256 X 256 X 256). “Estimates of how
many unique colors the human eye can distinguish vary
widely, but even the most liberal estimates are well shy
of 16.7 million” (http://www.peachpit.com/articles/arti-
cle.aspx?p=1709190&seqNum=2). This is a fancy way
of saying that a good digital camera can see and capture
details on a coin’s surface that are normally invisible
to the eye—even under magnification. Unfortunately,
it is relatively easy to make these details visible dur-
Fig. 3. An 1875-S 20C (PCGS MS65). The sales image
from Stacks is on the left, my image is on the right (see
text for details).
ing image processing. An example is shown in Fig. 3
where the application of too much digital contrast dur-
ing processing reveals otherwise invisible differences in
surface details.
It 1s estimated that modern digital chips can detect
(at least) 50% more shades of each color than the eye.
Thus, the camera “is a tool for capturing images, which
later need the human touch in order to complete them
towards our liking. In order to be able to complete the
images towards your liking in post processing, you’ ll
need to rely on your eyesight and previous experiences
(in software editing and in the manner of how the pic-
ture should look like” (https://www.lightstalking.com/
human-vision-vs-camera/).
My photographic setup can be quickly assembled
from the following items:
A) A Tripar Small Adjustable Easel (Part #28-
1633) which can be purchased from Amazon
for $5.75. I modified this 3 2X 2% X 4” easel
by gluing a rectangular piece of white plastic
across the bottom so it can hold a coin slab (Fig
4 left panel). This is a key (and novel) compo-
nent of the system!
B) One 4 X 4” piece of clean bright white card-
board (Fig 4 center) on which the slab will rest
(Fig 4 right).
Fig. 4. An adjustable easel and white cardboard are
used to help position the coin in front of and below
the camera lens.
C) A Sunpak 620-250 12.2” Low Angle Mini-Pro
Plus Tripod (Fig. 5, left) with 3-Way Panhead:
Extended Height: 12.2”. Minimum Height: 7.1”
Weight Capacity: 2.2 Ibs). Available through
Amazon or ebay. Running $5-10 used on ebay.
D) A Fasthomegoods Modern clamp design dual
adjustable gooseneck arm spotlight (Fig. 5
right) with 3W LED lights ($38.99 from Ama-
zon). The light produced is ~ 5100K (Daylight).
E) A digital single lens reflex (SLR) camera. I use
a Nikon D70S with a DX format (24 X 16 mm)
image sensor and an old (film camera) Micro-
Nikkor 55 mm 1:2.8 macro lens (a 55 mm lens
on a DX camera becomes ~ 80mm). Although
17]
Fig. 5. My camera tripod (left) and adjustable gooseneck
LED light source (right).
my macro lens fits the D70S digital camera
body, it can only be used in the manual mode
(the camera can’t communicate with the old
lens on automatic settings). I control the im-
age density by manually changing the camera
shutter speed and sometimes the lens F-stop.
(Changing the F-stop changes the depth of focus
as well as the resolution—so I tend to set the
lens at F-11 to F-16 where the depth of focus
is enough to capture all the surface features of
the coin. Once set, I simply change the shutter
speed to control the exposure). On the other
hand, if you have a macro lens designed for
your digital SLR camera, the camera histogram
function will give you a good idea of where the
exposure should be set. A used functional Nikon
or Canon single lens reflex digital camera (like
the D70S) can be purchased on ebay for around
$50 (e.g., see the TryC2 store) as can older
macro lenses.
F) One or more broad coin books—for position-
ing the camera above the coin (see Fig.6), and
finally:
G) Acomputer with software (e.g., Adobe Photo-
shop Elements) for cropping and tweaking the
raw images.
I usually setup the system on one side of my desk,
so I can remain seated during focus and photography.
The goal is to configure it so that the light from the dual
gooseneck lamp bulbs evenly illuminates the front sur-
face of the slab and coin at an obtuse angle. This 1s most
easily done by positioning the camera above the coin,
and the slab behind the lights. I do this by mounting the
gooseneck lamp to the side of my desk and by placing
the tripod on a broad thin flat book which itself rests on
the desk surface or another book. I then place the easel
with the coin on the desk surface below the camera lens
and behind the lights.
The easel and camera are then manipulated so the coin
is centered and in focus at the proper magnification in
the camera field of view (Fig. 7). (Whenever I need to
change magnification, I use other coin books to adjust
the position of the camera relative to the easel). The
plane of the coin (i.e., the angle of the easel surface)
should be parallel to the surface of the lens so that the
coin does not appear in the viewfinder as a distorted
circle. (The viewfinder on my Nikon DS70 has a large
circle in the center of the viewing field that makes this
process easy). By adjusting the angle that the easel holds
the coin as well as the angle of the lights and camera,
the illumination can be adjusted to eliminate hotspots
visible through the viewfinder, and also so that much
of the light hitting the slab 1s reflected off the slab and
-
Y .~ ABrToe-see
ur por A10jg 210
NS +” f
gi-£OcF Aiioey PH Put
Fig. 6. My setup for shooting high resolution images of
slabbed coins (See text for details).
Fig. 7. My setup, with the LED lights on, with the coin
visible in the camera screen.
172
out of the camera lens field, and only the light reflected
off the coin is seen through the viewfinder. The image
through the viewfinder is the image you will capture,
although it will be a bit larger. This alignment process
requires patience but is worth the effort. That said, the
luster pattern of a coin and its toning color profile(s)
will differ, sometimes radically, as the lighting condi-
tions are changed, i.e., the luster and toning may look
very different depending on the angle the lights impinge
on the coin.
Since my digital camera cannot be fitted with a re-
mote shutter trigger (like the old 35mm film cameras),
I use its timing function to trip 1t without touching the
camera. One of the niftiest advantages of modern digital
|
IN
Fig. 8. Left: Raw digital photograph, from the coin
shown in Fig. 6 (and 7), downloaded into my computer
after photography. Right: Image of the coin, pictured on
the left, after cropping and adjusting the histogram (via
Photoshop Elements) until it matches what the eye sees.
cameras is that you are immediately able to see and re-
view the captured images most of which can be deleted
later at no cost. I bracket the exposures by changing the
shutter speed between when the captured image of the
coin 1s clearly too bright by eye to when it is clearly too
dark. The most useful image will be somewhere in be-
tween. After shooting both the obverse and reverse im-
ages, I dust off the slab with canned air and then change
the lighting conditions and repeat the process. I’ve shot
many otherwise “perfect” images that are marred by a
piece of lint/hair that landed on the slab over the coin as
it was being photographed. The system described here
should also work for non-slabbed coins, if a way is de-
vised to secure the coin near the center of the cardboard
on the easel without damaging it.
Once I’ve finished photography, I import the images
into my computer and delete those that are obviously
over or under exposed or out of focus. I then open what I
think are the best images in Adobe Photoshop Elements
(e.g., Fig. 8) where they are cropped (usually I only
want the coin, not the slab—but the system can also be
used to photograph the whole slab), resized (my person-
al preference is 5” square, 300 pixels per inch) and then
processed. While processing I view the actual coin using
the same gooseneck lamp used to shoot the image in or-
der to compare the coin to the image for the best match.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK K K OK
“LET US AT LEAST AGREE...” —ITCAN’T
Mike Packard
The July 2019 issue of Penny-Wise contained an article
by Bill Eckberg titled “What is a Variety?” His con-
clusion is that a variety is a “unique obverse/reverse die
combination” and that “legally-authorized or mandated
changes” define new varieties”.* I think the first part of
his definition is too narrow. Specifically, I disagree with
his contention that edge ornamentation is not a factor
to consider when determining a coin’s variety. In part,
I think his conclusion results from a misinterpretation
of what is legally authorized under the Coinage Act of
1792. Mandated changes in our coinage will usually re-
sult in new varieties, but that they “define new varieties”
may be a bit of a push. During the 65 years large cents
and half cents were minted, the only “mandated chang-
es” affecting them were two reductions in the mandated
1 Eckberg, Bill. July 2019. “What Is A Variety?” Penny-
Wise LIII, Number 3, Pages 104-7.
2 Id., Page 105, second and third full paragraphs in the
right-hand column.
weights of the denominations. One of these changes oc-
curred before the coins were ever minted.
Let us start with “legally-authorized.” The legal au-
thorization for coining half cents (and other Federal
coinage) is given by the Coinage Act of April 2, 1792.
Section 9 of the Act lists the denominations, composi-
tions, and weights of coins authorized to be minted:
“And be it further enacted, That there shall be
from time to time struck and coined at the said
mint, coins of gold, silver, and copper, of the fol-
lowing denominations, values and descriptions, . .
. Cents—each to be of the value of the one hun-
dredth part of a dollar, and to contain eleven pen-
ny-weights of copper. Half Cents—each to be of
the value of half a cent, and to contain five penny-
weights and half a penny-weight of copper.”
3 Coinage Act of April 2, 1792. United States Congress.
4 A penny-weight is 24 grains so cents were to have a
173
Section 10 of this Act describes the devices and legends
that needed to appear on US coinage:
“And be it further enacted, That, upon the said
coins respectively, there shall be the follow-
ing devices and legends, namely: Upon one side
of each of the said coins there shall be an impres-
sion emblematic of liberty, with an inscription of
the word Liberty, and the year of the coinage; and
upon the reverse of each of the gold and silver
coins there shall be the figure or representation of
an eagle, with this inscription, “UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA,” and upon the reverse of each
of the copper coins, there shall be an inscription
which shall express the denomination of the piece,
namely, cent or half-cent, as the case may require.”
So, the Act specified the weights of the cents and half
cents and stated that they should be made of copper. It
mandated certain elements be included in the design
of the coins, but it did not specify how those elements
should be arranged, what else could be included, or what
elements were forbidden to be included. For example,
all coins were to have “an impression emblematic of
liberty,” but it did not mandate whether the impression
should be of a standing figure or of a bust. Should it face
left or right? Should it carry a pole with a cap on the end
or have flowing or coiffed hair? Section 10, did NOT
specify that “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” appear
on the reverse of cents and half cents or that their revers-
es display a chain or wreath. The fact that cents and half
cents contain these devices does NOT mean they are 1l-
legal products. The fact that some cents and half cent
have edge lettering or other ornamentation does NOT
mean they were put there illegally. Eckberg’s contention
to the contrary is wrong.
I think the mint had a sound reason to put edge or-
namentation on cents and half cents—to help prevent
counterfeiting. The states, especially those in the North-
east, were swimming in lightweight counterfeit British
copper half pennies in the late 1780s and early 1790s.
Most counterfeiters did not have the wherewithal to
put edge ornamentation on their products, which would
make passing their fraudulent fabrications much more
difficult.
Section 10 listed what devices and legends were re-
quired to be included on our coinage of the time. The
exact designs of the coins were left to others, no doubt
a committee that probably the Director of the Mint, the
weight of 264 grains and half cents 132 grains. The Act of
January 14, 1793 lowered these authorized weights (before
minting began) to 208 grains for the cent and 104 grains
for the half cent.
engraver, and the Secretary of State. Whether to include
edge ornamentation and what it should be was their de-
cision. Once a design had been agreed upon, the engrav-
er got to work and made an obverse and a reverse dies as
closely matching the approved design as he could. One
set of dies was generally not sufficient to strike the de-
sired quantity of coins for that denomination, so the en-
graver made additional dies as closely matching the first
set as he could. Were these new dies, which would result
in one or more new varieties, “legally-authorized’”? Of
course! The Director of the Mint was charged with pro-
ducing coins and if it took more than one obverse, re-
verse, or edge device die to accomplish that, he had the
power to approve the use of additional dies. He even had
the authority to change the design of the coins--which
he did for cents in 1793—twice. A separate Act of Con-
gress was not required.
Eckberg wants us to “agree with Sheldon, Breen and
others that Mint-caused variations in edge ornamenta-
tion define subvarieties.” Sorry, I can’t agree. Everyone
knows the cents and half cents struck by our mint have
three sides—obverse, reverse, and edge. Most of the
cents and half cents that have been struck have a plain
edge, but many struck early in the mint’s history have
edges with letters or other mint-imposed markings.
These letters or markings were imparted using a ma-
chine that rolled the planchet between two plates, each
with approximately one-half the wording or markings.
These plates are dies. I agree with Cohen,’ Weber® and
Manley’ that different mint-created edge markings also
result in a different variety. I would define a die variety
as a coin struck from dies where at least one of the
dies is identifiably different from those used to strike
another coin of the same denomination. If all coins of
a denomination for a given year have a plain edge, then
Eckberg’s definition that “‘a variety is a unique obverse/
reverse die combination” holds. However, if the coin
has mint-created edge markings, then Eckberg’s defini-
tion is not sufficient. Even if the obverse/reverse dies are
the same, if the edge markings differ, then the coins are
different varieties -- not different subvarieties, different
varieties.
Cohen got this right in my opinion. For 1794, Cohen
5 Cohen, Roger S., Jr. 1982, American Half Cents the
“Little Half Sisters,” (Second Edition). Wigglesworth &
Ghatt Co., Alexandria, VA. Page XII.
6 Weber, Bill. March 1998. “An open letter to R. Tetten-
horst: Varieties and Subvarieties,” Penny-Wise XXXII.
Pages 160-3.
7 Manley, Ron. September 1998. “THE TERMS “VARI-
ETY” AND “SUBVARIETY” as Used by Various Au-
thors,” Penny-Wise XXXII. Pages 322-325.
174
used small “a” and “b” letters after his obverse/reverse
“die combination number” to distinguish coins with
small or large edge letters. For 1995, he used “a” and
his current designations. For example, his variety 1-A
would become 1-A-L or 1-A-S depending on the size of
the edge letters on the coin. His 1795 2-A would become
“b” letters to distinguish between thick, lettered edge
and thin, plain edge examples of his variety 2. For the
1797 low heads, he used small “‘a’’, ““b” and “‘c”’ letters to
differentiate those with a plain edge, a lettered edge or a
gripped edge. He intended these as variety designations,
not subvariety designations. Indeed, he consistently
uses the term “variety,” never “subvariety,” throughout
his text. He thought it would be more confusing to as-
sign separate variety numbers to coins struck from the
same obverse/reverse die combination (as Gilbert did)
than to list the varieties in the manner he used. Un-
fortunately, he was wrong. Weber tells us that Cohen
“expressed misgivings for having described the 1794’s
C-1b through C-6b, 1795 C-2b and 1797 C-3b/c with
lower case letters, instead of providing the separate va-
riety numbers they deserve.” °
Cohen also used the letters “a” and “b” to distinguish
heavy- and light-weight coins struck for his varieties 5
and 6. When he was preparing his second edition, he
decided he was wrong to list them as separate varieties
because they were struck from the same set of dies. He
thought about delisting the “a” and “b” designations in
his second edition, but left them in because they were in
common use by that time.’
Weber and Manley agree with Cohen on the role edge
markings has in determining what is a die variety. Weber
states, “A die variety is created when the mint is autho-
rized by its controlling agencies to use an obverse and
reverse die — and when appropriate, edge dies to transfer
their designs onto planchets of a certain size, alloy, and
weight.” Eckberg misinterprets Weber’s meaning here
when he claims that, “By Weber’s definition, then, the
only legitimate variety, beyond the numbered obverse/
reverse combinations, would be the 1795 C2b, because
it was struck at a different, authorized legal standard.
(Emphasis his)”''! That was not Weber’s position at all.
Weber stated his position very clearly in his Summary,
“Collectors, authors, and cataloguers will recognize that
all dies — edge, obverse, and reverse — are of equal im-
portance for assigning variety numbers.’
Eckberg’s variety nomenclature for the 1794 half cents
can be easily modified to incorporate these changes by
adding a second letter (L (for large) or S (for small)) to
8 Id., Page 160.
9 Conversation with Roger Cohen.
10 Id., Page 161.
11 Op. cit., Page 105.
12 Op. cit., Page 163.
either 2-A-H (for heavy) or 2-A-L (for light) and his
1797 low heads would become 3-B-P (for plain edge),
3-B-L (for lettered edge) or 3-B-G (for gripped edge).
Eckberg also states “mandated changes in the coins
define new varieties.”'’ Here it important to note that
the change in variety may or may not be a change in die
variety. A coin’s variety, by necessity, includes its die
variety but may also take into account other factors not
related to differences in the dies used to strike a coin.
If the mandated design or legend is changed, a new die
variety 1s created because these changes will result in
a modification in one or more dies used to strike the
coins. Changes in the mandated weight or alloy need
not result in changes to the dies, although the mint might
well change the dies to differentiate the coins struck pre-
and post-change. If coins are struck with the same dies
pre- and post-change, then there would be no change in
the die variety although there would be a change in the
variety designation. The change in variety could be ac-
complished assigning a new variety number or by add-
ing a number, letter, or other differentiator after the die
variety designation.
The only mandated change that affected cents and half
cents (as far as I am aware) was the late 1795 reduction
in the authorized weight from 208 grains to 168 grains
for cents and 104 grains to 84 grains for half cents. Only
one obverse/reverse die combination was used to strike
half cents of both weights, the C-2a and C-2b (B-2a and
B-2b). Under my definition, they are different die va-
rieties because there 1s an identifiable difference in the
dies used to mint the coins. One (the C-2a) has a lettered
edge while the other (C-2b) has a plain edge. Absent this
difference in edges, the die varieties would still be the
same but the varieties would be different. The only alloy
changes of which I’m aware occurred in the mid-1850s
when the mint made a few trial strikes using blends of
copper with either zinc and silver (1854) or nickel (two
blends in 1856). This was not a mandated change and
the coins were not intended for circulation. They are not
new die varieties, but they should be differentiated from
the all copper circulation strike pieces. These are listed
by Judd'* as patterns and have Judd numbers (Judd-155
(1854) and Judd-157 (both 1856s)). The Judd number
should be included along with the half cent die variety
number to properly identify these pieces.
13 Op. cit., Page 105.
14 J. Hewitt Judd, M.D. 2008. “United States Pattern
Coins,” (10" Edition). Whitman Publishing, LLC. Atlanta
Ga.
ES
So far, we’ve discussed varieties in the context of the
dies used to strike the coins and government-mandated
changes. How should we treat mistakes that occur at
the mint? Should they just be classified as errors, or can
some result in new varieties? What about a coin that es-
caped the normal process of having its edge lettered.'°
Is that a different die variety? I would argue, “Yes”. In
this case, the lack of edge lettering make that part of
the coin “identifiably different” from other coins struck
using those obverse and reverse dies. Likewise, if a let-
tered edge coin were discovered for an obverse/reverse
die combination that was hitherto only known with a
plain edge, I think that coin too would be a new vari-
ety.'° What about a brockage or uniface coin then? If
there is only one possibility as to what the missing die is
(either because the existing die struck side is only paired
with one opposing die or because its die state indicates
only one likely opposing die), then “No”. Assign it as an
error of the appropriate die variety. If multiple possibili-
ties exist, I’d still call it an error even though it satisfies
my definition of a distinct variety because one die (side
of the coin) is “identifiably different” from other coins
sharing the properly struck side(s). What about other
minting process errors that do not result from differenc-
es in dies used to strike a coin such as clipped planchets,
off-center strikes, rotated dies, blundered edge letters,
misaligned dies, and multiple strikes, among others?
These are all errors, not separate varieties.
Heresy alert! [ think errors are an instance where a
subvariety designation could be warranted. I would de-
fine a subvariety as a coin struck from a given set
of dies that differs In some way from another coin
struck from the same dies where the difference was
not the result of an officially mandated change."’ With
a couple of possible exceptions, error coins are struck
from the same dies as non-error coins of the same vari-
ety. The errors did not result from “mandated changes”
to the denomination. Therefore, error coins are gener-
ally not separate varieties, but they meet the above defi-
nition of subvarieties. The subvariety identifier could be
15 Goldberg’s Davy II Collection (Sept. 2011) had four
1794 half cents with plain edges (lots 101 (C-1), 103 (C-
2), 118 (C-9) and 119 (lightweight C-9)).
16 Goldberg’s Davy Collection (Sept 2010) contained a
1795 C-5b with a lettered edge (lot 32). Recently, a 1795
C-6a with edge lettering was discovered.
17 I realize this definition covers an expansive set of pos-
sibilities, as demonstrated below, but haven’t yet come up
with a definition that is more narrowly focused. I agree
with Manley that a variety comprises of the sum of its
subvarieties (op. cit., page 323). Thus, a variety collec-
tor can achieve his goal by acquiring an example of any
subvariety.
a large E appended after the die variety number. Thus, a
double struck 1832 C-1 would become subvariety C-1E.
If desired, the subvariety designation could be refined
further to identify the type of error.
How should we treat coins whose weights differ sub-
stantially from the authorized weight? They don’t merit
a separate variety designation because none of the dies
used to strike them is identifiably different from those
used to strike coins of the proper weight and no man-
dated change authorized their actual weights. Are they
ERRORS? What if the mint intentionally struck light-
weight or heavyweight planchets? In 1795, the mint
struck a few lettered edge coins on thin planchets that
generally weigh in the 77-92 grain range.'* These pieces
were produced before the weights were officially re-
duced and were apparently used to determine how the
lighter weight pieces would fare under the then current
minting process. Thus they are not the result of a man-
dated change. Again, these off-weight coins could be
listed as subvarieties. “Substantially different’ would
have to be defined, and I submit that the percentage de-
viation of the lower bound of a “normal weight range”
should be greater than the percentage deviation of the
upper bound to allow for the loss of weight from nor-
mal circulation. For example, a “normal weight” coin
might be defined as one whose weight falls in a range
from 87.5 to 110 percent of the authorized weight. Coins
deemed overweight (weights above the normal range)
could have a subvariety designation “H” (for heavy)
appended after the variety number and those deemed
underweight could have an “L” (for light) appended. I
suspect there are more overweight coins, especially for
those struck after the authorized weight was reduced to
84 grains in late 1795. I also suspect most underweight
coins will be for coins that should weigh 104 grains.
A separate, but related issue from under/overweight
issue 1s how to treat coins struck on spoiled cents, TAL
tokens, and other previously struck items. Again, they
are not separate varieties, but also could be designated
as subvarieties. One could use “C” if a cent undertype is
visible, a “TI” if the undertype is from a TAL token, or
“X” if the undertype is from another source or can’t be
deciphered. A heavy 1795 Cohen variety 6 with a TAL
undertype would be designated as variety “C-6HT.”
18 See an excellent discussion of these pieces by R. Tetten-
horst, “Three New Subvarieties of Half Cents? A Specu-
lation” Penny-Wise XXXII March 1998, pages 64-70.
These lettered edge light weight coins are for the 1794 C-9
and 1795 C-1 and C-2 varieties. Tettenhorst speculated
that they may be pattern pieces made to show what half
cents would look like if their weight were reduced. He
believed the mint later placed the pieces into circulation.
176
That’s starting to look a bit complex.
Eckberg notes that half cents struck on heavy
planchets did not comply with the law. He is correct, but
think of the constraints the mint was under. They had a
mass of spoiled cents, TAL tokens and other items they
wanted to turn into half cent blanks. What is the pro-
cess for doing this and getting the weights correct? They
needed to heat the host pieces to soften them; run them
through rollers (perhaps more than once) to reduce the
thickness to the appropriate size; anneal them again to
soften them so the half cent planchets could be cut out;
and then strike the coins. The bottleneck is obviously
the roller step. If they tried to roll the host pieces while
the planchets were hot, they’d need to use tongs to place
them in the rollers. Hot pieces could be easily dropped,
risking burns; the tongs could get caught in the rollers;
and if the pieces made it through the rollers, they would
probably fall on the floor, again risking burns. If the
annealed host pieces were cooled before being putting
through the rollers, they could be placed in the rollers
by hand, but that would risk pinching fingers. Again the
process of rolling would heat the pieces, and workers
would risk being burned as the pieces fell on the floor.
Some cents and TAL tokens obviously went through
the rollers because they are thin and of approximately
normal weight. However, in the interest of time (and
safety), I’m sure that at some point a decision was made
to skip the rolling step altogether. The host pieces were
annealed, planchets cut (many if not most overweight),
and the planchets struck into half cents. Problem con-
sidered solved.
Are die states separate varieties? Certainly one die
state exhibits an identifiable difference when compared
to another. They are not separate varieties because they
were struck from the same set of dies. But here again,
die states can be considered a type of subvariety.
Are proofs separate varieties? They can be if they are
struck from dies not used to strike pieces intended for
circulation. The Missouri Cabinet contained 51 varieties
of proof half cents. Thirty-seven were struck from die
combinations that were not used for circulation strikes.
These deserve their own die variety numbers. The other
14 are not separate varieties but are subvarieties. Their
special status is noted by having “Proof” added after the
variety number.
So, how many varieties of half cent are there? That
depends on whether we assign variety numbers to some
mint errors. If we don’t, there are 136 half cent variet-
ies — 99 business strike varieties and 37 proofs that were
not struck from business strike dies. The business strike
varieties are the 99 Cohen varieties minus his 1795 C-5b
and C-6b. To these 97 varieties, I would add Breen’s
1854 1-B and 1856 1-A, the varieties with the rust pit on
the “I” of “UNITED”. I think these are separate varieties
and not die states. And yes, I include the 1831 C-1 busi-
ness strike as one of the 99 varieties. In the interest of
saving some space, I won’t list these varieties.
In summary, I think Eckberg errs when he assumes
there was no legal basis for the mint to put edge letters
on coins. The Director of the Mint had the authority to
put ornamentation on the edge of copper coins. This was
a practical decision because, whether intended or not,
edge ornamentation was a means of limiting counter-
feiting. Eckberg’s assumption leads him to the conclu-
sion that edge lettering or ornamentation should play no
role in defining a variety. He is wrong, in my opinion. I
believe Cohen, Weber and Manley were correct in their
belief that all dies—obverse, reverse, and edge—need
to be taken into account when determining a coin’s die
variety. The only mandated change affecting large cents
and half cents of which I’m aware was the weight reduc-
tion in 1795. Each denomination had only one obverse/
reverse die combination that struck coins of both autho-
rized weights (S-76a and S-76b for cents and C-2a and
C-2b for half cents). These are different die varieties be-
cause the “a” varieties had a lettered edge while the “b”
varieties did not. Absent this change, they would be the
same die variety but different varieties based on their
different authorized weights.
I’m trying to decide if I agree with Eckberg that it is
important to have a universally accepted definition of
variety. I realize that many, perhaps most collectors
never look past the date and mintmark on their coins.
They don’t care about varieties. The holes in a Whit-
man folder correspond to their collecting desires. I also
realize that many of those who recognize that coins of
a given type and date may have been struck from iden-
tifiably different obverse and/or reverse dies never look
at or care about what is on the coin’s third side. Their
definition of variety ignores this side, but their defini-
tion 1s incomplete. It is, however, the way they collect.
I choose to include the third side when defining variety.
However, I also choose to not add certain varieties to my
collection for reason of cost. For example, I do not own
any of Cohen’s 1794 “B girls.” If I can cherry pick one,
Pll add it, but I don’t pursue already attributed exam-
ples. That is the way I collect. Set your own standards.
Collect in a way that is fun, educational, meaningful,
and affordable for you. Share your enthusiasm. Bring a
coin to the Happenings or have a whist match with an-
other local collector. Who knows what you or the other
attendees might discover.
wg)
UNRAVELING THE MYSTERY OF A MINT ERROR
Ed Fuhrman
Early in the month of January 2019, I was attending
the F.U.N. coin show in Orlando, Florida. I went to the
show to unveil a new variety of half cent that I had re-
cently discovered. I gave a short presentation about the
coin during the EAC meeting that was held there. Just
after the meeting, fellow EAC member George Trostel
approached me and said he had a coin for sale that was
similar to the one I had been discussing at the meeting.
Of course I was surprised to hear this and was eager to
see the coin. George said the piece was similar to mine
but it was a mint error. Did he say mint error? That’s one
of my specialties! I love collecting Half Cents, but I love
Half Cent mint errors even more! In fact, if I have the
opportunity to pick up a nice variety, I’d prefer to have a
mint error rather than a normally struck piece. So need-
less to say, I was just itching to see this coin George had.
We both agreed to meet later that afternoon on the FUN
show bourse floor so I could view the coin.
EAC dealer and friend Kevin Vinton was kind enough
to let us use the good lighting at his table so I could get
a proper view of this coin. As George was handing me
the coin, he began to explain the piece in more detail. He
said it was a 1795 C-6a (thin planchet variety) that had
been double struck. However, the coin had three edge
letters showing! The letters “H U N” were clearly vis-
ible on the edge of the coin. And George felt that the
undertype from the initial strike was not that of a 1795
C-6a, but instead from a different 1795 variety. Wow! I
had never seen or heard of such a thing before. Two dif-
ferent varieties of half cent displayed on the same coin?
That was unheard of to my knowledge. But I had no
reason to doubt what George was saying. I know he is
a knowledgeable EAC member. So I began to examine
the coin more closely. Sure enough, it appeared to be
just as he was claiming it was. The letters “H U N” were
clearly impressed and unmistakable on the edge of the
coin. The planchet on which this coin was struck was
from the end of a strip, so the coin 1s misshapen. The
flat area where the end of strip error occurs is where
these three edge letters reside. The letters appeared to
be stretched horizontally — this was probably due to the
coin getting jammed in the Castaing machine because of
the flat edge on the planchet.
As I examined the undertype from the first strike, I
could clearly see the letters “ES OF AMERI” as well
as some leaves, veins, berries, and denticles. The initial
strike was just about 50% off center. No undertype was
visible on the obverse at all. When I looked closely at
the letters, I could see that the spacing was clearly dif-
ferent than that of the spacing on the 1795 C-6a. The
only explanation I could come up with was that it was
most likely struck as a 1795 C-1 or C-2a and then the
misstruck coin was later recycled and used to strike a
1795 C-6a. This could explain the existence of the edge
lettering as well. Just as I told this to George, he pulls
out the envelope for the coin. I immediately recognized
the envelope and handwriting. The coin was originally
found by Tom Reynolds. Inside the envelope was a little
piece of paper where Tom explained what he thought the
coin was. He had basically arrived at the same conclu-
sion as I had. Now of course, I was doing all of this on
178
the bourse at the FUN show. I didn’t have any of my
books or a computer with me at the time, so I was doing
the best I could under the circumstances. I had no reason
to doubt the coin was what George and Tom were saying
it was. Heck, even my initial conclusion about the coin
concurred with theirs.
1195 wae,
<a hits eS OF AMERI onauniface planchet. This planchet was set aside and later
r a ae This piece is double struck on a lettered edge planchet. HUN and parts of
At this point I was definitely interested in getting this
coin for my collection. I asked George how much he
wanted for the coin. He quoted me a price, but I felt
it was a bit too high. I offered him a little less than his
asking price and he said, “I'll think about it.”” We were
unable to make a deal that day, so we parted ways and
George left the coin show. We both agreed to keep in
touch and talk about the coin in the future. A few months
later, the Baltimore coin show was coming up. I contact-
ed Mr. Trostel and asked him if he could bring the coin
to the show and we could discuss it further. He agreed
and we both met at the show.
After a few minutes of negotiation, we finally agreed
on a price and I bought the coin. As with all negotia-
tions, each side has to compromise a little bit. I came up
a little from my initial offer and George came down a bit
from what he wanted. We met somewhere in the middle
and I know we were both happy in the end.
When I arrived home, I took some nice photos of my
new prize and began a very close examination of the
coin. I wanted to confirm that this piece was indeed
what these gentlemen were claiming it to be.
The weight was 78 grains. This weight is proper and
within the tolerance for a 1795 C-6a. When I examined
the edge lettering, 1t appeared to be the small edge let-
tering style of 1794 and not that of 1795. The letters
are a little distorted, so I was unsure of the style when
I first looked at it at the FUN show and then again in
Baltimore. But now that I had some time to study it and
compare to the other coins in my collection, it was most
definitely the small edge letters style used in 1794.
Next, I took the photos of the coin and uploaded them
to my computer. I then attempted to overlay the reverse
of a 1795 C-1 over the visible undertype on my coin.
This is a fairly simple process whereby you use some
computer software to make a translucent overlay of one
coin over another. As long as you match the size cor-
rectly, everything should align properly.
To my surprise, they did NOT line up. In fact, 1t wasn’t
even close. I must admit, I was upset and shocked. I
thought to myself “How could I screw up like that? Af-
ter all these years of studying these coins and learning
everything I can about them! What’s wrong with me?”
I was not happy that I had just spent a lot of money on
something, and it wasn’t what I thought it was.
After beating myself up for a few minutes, I settled
down and was determined to figure this out. Even if it
meant a loss of some sort, I was going to make this a
learning experience.
I knew this coin was struck over something; I just
needed to figure out what it was. I always try to use logic
and reason when figuring out a puzzle like this. The first
thing I did was to take all of the 1795 reverses and then
attempt to overlay them on the undertype. I had already
tried the 1795 C-1 and C-2a. (They both share the same
reverse die). I then tried the other reverses and none of
them lined up either. So whatever the host coin was, it
was clearly not from a 1795 dated Half Cent. I then re-
membered that the edge lettering was that of 1794. So I
thought maybe there was a chance it was struck over a
coin from that year. The last variety struck in 1794 was
the Cohen-9. I also know that there are a few thin plan-
chet experimental pieces that were struck using that set
of dies as well. Could it be that one of those thin plan-
chet C-9’s was struck 50% off center and then tossed
into the recycle bin for later use? I was about to find out.
When I downloaded a 1794 C-9 reverse and used the
overlay software to put it over the undertype — BIN-
GO!!! We have a perfect match! I couldn’t believe my
eyes. What an incredible turn of events. And more 1m-
179
portantly, what an incredible piece this turned out to be.
A 1795 C-6a struck over a spoiled 1794 C-9 thin plan-
chet 50% off center error. So now we can add spoiled
half cents to the list of planchet stock the mint used to
produce 1795 C6’s.
This whole episode from start to finish was an emo-
tional rollercoaster, but I’m so glad it turned out well.
George and Tom were almost right. This coin was struck
over another variety. It just turned out to be another va-
riety from a completely different year! As far as I know,
this is a unique error for the Half Cent series.
Some final thoughts: It pays to do your homework and
your own research. Even though this piece went through
the hands of several knowledgeable EAC members (two
dealers and one collector), none of them quite figured
it out. In this case, the overlays proved invaluable in
determining what was really happening with this coin.
There are limits to what one can accomplish just using
the eye alone. Luckily we live in a technological age
where digital photography and computers are abundant
and affordable. This coin might have remained a mys-
tery otherwise.
* CK OK CK OK OK CK CK KK KK K KK OK
COUNTERFEIT COIN OF THE WEEK-1806 “C-1” HALF CENT
Jack D. Young
This is intended as an update for the Membership on the continuing research of deceptive struck counterfeits
documented to date, specifically the 1806 “C-1” half cent. The content and format of this article has been signifi-
cantly revised and updated from my previous version published in the January, 2017 Penny-Wise. At that time, we
had documented 7 different examples including a 2013 one that we suspected as being the possible source coin,
primarily due to differences seen in the tell-tale damage at the “A” in HALF: Since then we have documented 2
other examples in that “die state,” the earliest now dated to 2008!
DS-1 example from the Dark Side Collection
I thought I should take the time to update the con-
tinuing research project on the struck counterfeit 1806
“C-1s” since my January 2017 Penny-Wise article. Sig-
nificant developments to date include:
1) The documented population has grown to 14 ex-
amples with 6 seen in TPG holders.
2) Have now documented two different “die states”
(similar to the 1803 “C-3s”); the 15' I have designated
“DS-1” (for “Die State” or “Dark Side’, whichever
works best!) and has a distinctive “cut” at the “A”
in HALF. “DS-2” has an apparent attempted “repair”
resulting in the “plugged A” as my friend Mark Klein
designated it.
3) I have had really good images taken of the seven
ae
DS-2 Plugged “A”
DS-1 Cut at “A”
examples currently in the Dark Side Collection for
better identification of common “‘sister marks’’.
4) I have had metallurgical testing done at an accred-
ited testing lab to one, dispel any thoughts these may
be electrotypes (eliminated through the testing- XR
at two levels and specific gravity); and two, to de-
termine if there are any significant “trace elements”
in these that differentiate them from known genuine
examples of the original time of minting.
5) And, like the counterfeit 1836 “Gobrechts,” we
have pushed the time-line for the 18‘ documented ex-
ample back to 2008.
In order to better organize this review, I will start with
the latest “Condition Census” of the documented exam-
ples and the respective time-line:
Focus will be on the two die states and images of my
examples for comparison, but I include images of the
earliest known and possible “source example” (as a
result of its timing and state) but agree this cannot be
conclusively determined from just these low resolution
images alone.
The obverse 1s really not clear enough to indicate many
possible attribution sister marks besides the “scratch”
but the reverse does show better; I have indicated in
green the marks I feel worth further review and research
as potential indicators in the images (of course I had an
advantage in this having “discovered” this example after
my P-W and Coin Week articles on the subject!).
180
Time line for the 1806 "C-1" Half Cent sidered probable source example (Jan *13).
OS-2 1) _ Jul 2008 Baltimore ANA Sale example (TPG certified) — possible source coin? Matching marks to example # 1 in green; pretty much
DS-2 2) Apr 2010 Internet venue example (TPG certified a direct copy of one to the other! The green verdigris
DS-2 3) Aug 2011 Chicago ANA Sale example (TPG certified) adds a touch of authenticity to this example not seen on
the 2008 version.
DS-1 4) jan 2013 Americana Auction Sale example (TPG certified)
Again, the major attribution mark for the counterfeits
in DS-1 is the cut on the “A” in HALF.
Fewer obvious matches to the obverse due to the poor
resolution of the example # 1 image but the obvious
scratch lines up. Since having the high resolution 1m-
DS-2 9) Dec 2015 TPG submission example- returned raw/ "body bagged" ages made of the 7 examples there are more matching
DS-2 10) Jan 2016 Chinese Internet Seller example (Raw} sister marks apparent- I have imaged two of the DS-1
examples next for comparison.
DS-2 5) Jan 2013 internet venue example (Raw)
DS-2 6) Jun 2014 Internet venue example (Raw)
DS-2 7) Jul 2015 internet venue example (Raw)
DS-1 8) Aug 2015 Internet venue example (Raw)
DS-2 11) Oct 2016 internet venue example; now in a TPG holder
DS-2 12) Nov 14, 2016 2nd internet venue example (same seller); listing
DS-2 13) Jun 10, 2017 internet venue raw example; listing removed by seller
DS-1 14) Nov 2017 Internet example (origin China via Netherlands); now in a TPG holder
Images of example # 1 (through an ANACS holder) State
66 1”
DS-1 Example # 4 (notice slight doubling at ”’06”) Example #
And of course many of the “interesting” marks noted 14
on this example can be seen in much better detail in the
7 high resolution imaged examples!
Example # 4 Example # 14
Moving onto the “later” die state DS-2 with the plug
on the “A” in HALF; looking to see any other changes
in common marks.
Reverse of example # 14 (origin China via Netherlands);
now in a TPG holder State “DS-1” And just from the obverses there are a huge number of
common marks seen! The next image is from one of the
I continue this review with the DS-1 examples starting
three raw examples.
with the one that found its way here from China via the
Netherlands and was the last example documented at the And then a comparison of this one to another DS-2
time of the initial P- W article in 2017; this one surprised example, that one currently in a TPG holder.
me with the reverse state as it was the second example
observed with the cut “A” seen on the previously con-
18]
Example #7
Example # 7
White marks as always indicate common marks, red
are ones unique to one example in the comparison- a
good check to indicate two different examples (although
both being in-hand at once is good verification as well!).
It’s pretty easy to see the main attribution marks be-
tween the two states of these on the reverses- as previ-
ously noted the damage at the “A” is different from the
two groups.
Now to the obverses- the main marks of the scratches
are seen between the two groups; there are a large num-
ber of additional common marks on the DS-2 examples
I hadn’t originally noticed on the DS-1 ones, like the
knocks on the nose and the scratch through the “R” in
LIBERTY but they are there as well. Higher resolution
r)
DS-1 top, DS-2 bottom images
images allow more marks to become noticeable.
And now on to the metallurgical testing! The tests,
conduceted by Chris Pilliod, Senior Metallurgist at Car-
penter Technology in Reading, PA, consisted of:
1) “XRF at low voltage (5 kV) which will yield a sur-
face chemistry”.
2) “XRF (20kV) which will perhaps tell us if there is
any plating”.
3) “And SpG.” (specific gravity).
Note, I have removed the columns where there were
no results indicated for any sample.
To date I have been able to submit 5 raw examples: 2
1805 “C-4s,” 3 1806 “C-1s” and an 1836 Gobrecht dol-
lar just for good measure. The following chart shows the
results to date.
Unfortunately, we are limited on the sample size of
known counterfeits to analyze, and to make definitive
conclusions on such limited data is risky at best, but the
results as compared to known genuine ones is certainly
interesting!
The two 1805 half cents have nothing unusual which
at the start of this project left my tester skeptical that any
of these were fakes. I note that we do know the suspect
counterfeiters in the middle of all of this bought cull
large cents from a couple of dealers on the Bay, which
should logically test as genuine coins of the period.
But the 1806 results are turning the tide; it was after
testing the 24 and 3" 1806 HC that things got interest-
ing! As highlighted in the chart, these three are the only
ones to read a trace of zinc; they also show a trace of
lead which only shows in the 1794 large cent electrotype
182
(#6) and the genuine 1803 half cent (Note, the 1803 and
electro 1794 are the only 2 with antimony indicated as
well...). While further analysis is needed and being un-
dertaken, the main initial suspicious differences seem to
be the presence of zinc (in some cases extremely high
levels) and lead in the counterfeits, and at the same time
almost all the known genuine pieces exhibit residual
bismuth, while the counterfeits do not.
It is also interesting to note that the majority of the
genuine coins (half and large cents of the period) had
traces of bismuth in them while the 5 documented coun-
terfeit half cents did not. One of my reviewers stated
“the bismuth in the group versus not makes me wonder.
If they are using old coins as their medium, I would ex-
pect to see some in the counterfeit ones. Bi sticks around
and gets into the equipment and isn’t so easy to get rid
of. Lead, too, so that doesn’t surprise me that it’s in both
groups’.
I have another raw 1805 half cent to submit for test-
ing and have made the decision to remove one of the
slabbed 1806s from its holder to see where it fits into the
data with its “little sisters”! Stay tuned for more results
to follow...
And for those who wonder, yes I see these in my sleep
now... I did some additional late night searching and
found another undocumented example sold on the inter-
net in August of 2015. Images below!
Example # 8
And as always, the research continues to be a collab-
orative effort with many EAC and Dark Side members
and friends participating!
Members with computer access will find it very help-
ful to view the illustrations in enlarged format on the
EAC website. It is much easier to see the telltale iden-
tical marks Jack describes, in computer screen images
twice or more the size of the illustrations in the print
version. Also, I found myself wondering—given the zinc
(and sometimes tin) in the counterfeits—if notwithstand-
ing the suspect perpetrators buying up cull coppers
online, perhaps some of their planchet stock was com-
ing from melting down bronze cents of 1864-1942 and
1946-1981. —Editor”’
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK KK KK K OK
AMERICAN HARD TIMES TOKENS
Ray Rouse
American Hard Times Tokens were struck between
the early 1830s and the mid-1840s. They served as mon-
ey for change and small purchases. Much of their charm
comes from the use of satire and ridicule to espouse the
economic, political and social issues of the era.
Lyman H. Low’s original work on Hard Times Tokens
(published in 1899) divided them into five classes: (1)
Those that refer to the controversy about the Bank of
United States; (2) Those showing satirical and political
maxims of the times; (3) Those imitating legal coinage;
(4) Dated merchant tokens; (5) Mulings using the ob-
verses or reverses of any of the foregoing. Today many
undated merchant tokens which can be traced to the
Hard Times era have been added to his list.
The Bank of the United States was not a Federal insti-
tution. It was a very profitable private business owned
by shareholders, many of whom were foreign investors.
Chartered in 1816 for 20 years, it was authorized to pro-
vide financial services to the U.S. government, which
allowed it to both take in and pay out government mon-
ey. Its bank notes were widely accepted at face value,
whereas other banks found their paper bills discounted
outside their home areas. They felt this was unfair and
apparently President Andrew Jackson agreed with them.
Even though the full 20 years were not yet up, he chal-
lenged Congress to reauthorize the Bank. They did so,
and he vetoed the bill. The resultant storm of protest
from investors produced a flood of anti-Jackson tokens
in the 1834 midterm election.
183
Jackson was depicted as a Jackass with LL.D. printed
on its side. This referred to his being given an honorary
Doctor of Laws degree from Harvard University, even
though he had never gone to college. The removal of
U.S. government money from the Bank led his oppo-
nents, the Whigs, to further classify Jackson as a dicta-
tor, with MY SUBSTITUTE FOR THE U.S. BANK /
MY EXPERIMENT / MY CURRENCY / MY GLORY
on the reverse, while the legend PERISH CREDIT.
PERISH COMMERCE dominates the obverse.
YZ
ed
F
4 pe
ai
CP
=f
me
ee
i
h—
# Le
=e
|
==
i ie
yr.
rey
= 7
a
Another token shows Jackson in his military uniform
with a sword in his right hand and a purse of gold in
his left hand with the legend I TAKE THE RESPONSI-
BILITY, while the reverse shows that Jackass with the
LL.D. on its side, with ROMAN FIRMNES in the field
above.
From the time of the original 1792 Mint Act, U.S. gold
coins had been undervalued relative to silver. With each
five-dollar gold coin worth perhaps $5.10 in metal val-
ue, melting was inevitable. Many U.S. gold coins were
exported for the metal value. Thus there was little gold
in the nation’s banks to support public confidence in the
circulating paper mondy. In 1834 hard money support-
ers led by Senator Thomas Hart Benton introduced a bill
to reduce the weight of gold in our coinage. Soon tokens
appeared that satirized the new lighter weight gold coins
as BENTONIAN CURRENCY and MINT DROP.
The underlying problem was heavy speculation in
Western lands and railroads. The speculators used worth-
less bank notes from private “Wildcat Banks” to pay off
their purchases of railroad stocks and Western property.
a ‘
—
=" js
s+ == j
eetteir
When the U.S. government became the one getting no
money for the sale of its Western lands that became both
an economic and political problem. So in July of 1836
President Jackson issued the Specie Circular, which de-
clared that receivers of public money could accept only
gold or silver coins for the sale of public land.
Fearful of paper money having no value, citizens
hoarded specie, gold and silver, for security. “Wildcat
banks” issued more worthless paper money, some of
it in fractions of less than a dollar, but nobody trusted
these paper notes.
In the 1836 election, when Andrew Jackson’s hand-
picked successor, Martin Van Buren, ran for President,
he declared I FOLLOW IN THE STEPS OF MY IL-
LUSTRIOUS PREDECESSOR. His Whig opponents
produced a token pairing this legend with a running
Jackass (i.e., Jackson).
The Whigs brought out other anti-Van Buren tokens.
One suggested the consequences of his election with
the date 1837 and an image of the ship EXPERIMENT
foundering, with the legend VAN BUREN METALLIC
184
CURRENCY; while the reverse, dated 1841, shows the
CONSTITUTION sailing smoothly along with the leg-
end WEBSTER CREDIT CURRENT. (Daniel Webster
was a political opponent of Jackson and Van Buren, and
a sometime Presidential candidate.)
In May 1837, two months after Van Buren became
President, the banks stopped payment of coins for ANY
paper money and panic ensued. Many small banks
failed. Although by May 1838 most of the New York
banks were again redeeming paper notes for specie, in
October 1839 the largest state bank in the country, The
Bank of U.S. of Pennsylvania, failed along with over
100 small banks. The banks again suspended specie
payments. Although specie payments resumed again in
1840, a collapse of the Southern cotton banks in Febru-
ary 1841 resulted in a reported 91 additional bank fail-
ures and a third suspension of specie payments. Hard
Times continued.
Merchants saw the chance to promote their busi-
nesses, provide small change for their customers, and
make a profit by using tokens. Many of the tokens that
the merchants used were supplied by the button making
firm of J.M.L. & W.H. Scovill. Scovill produced a token
showing a Liberty Head on the obverse with the reverse
legend recycled from its earlier use against the Barbary
pirates: MILLIONS FOR DEFENSE, NOT ONE CENT
FOR TRIBUTE. This toekn looked like the contempo-
rary U.S. Large Cents, so perhaps the use of the word
NOT on the reverse was done to keep it from being
called a counterfeit. These tokens were reportedly only
about 40% copper. Since Scovill sold them to the mer-
chants at about 65 cents per hundred, both the Scovill
firm and the distributing merchants made a good profit.
Merchants turned to circulating “store cards” identifying
their businesses and wares. Examples include: Smiths
Clock Establishment in New York City, with its clock
face obverse and the legend TIME IS MONEY:and John
J. Adams of Taunton, Mass, who pictured a boar labeled
“Cash for Bristles,” with the legend ALL KINDS OF
BRUSHES MADE TO ORDER:
The anti-slavery cause also found expression on Hard
Times tokens. Legends AM I NOT A WOMAN & A
SISTER surrounding a chained female, and AM I NOT
A MAN AND A BROTHER surrounding a chained
male, borrow imagery from a number of English Conder
tokens of the 1790s.
a
Not all Hard Times Tokens are U.S. Large Cent size
pieces. In 1837 Dr. Lewis Feuchtwanger petitioned Con-
gress to adopt his “German silver,” a copper-zinc-nickel
alloy, for U.S. coin production. To show the advantages
of his metal, Dr. Feuchtwanger made many 18.5mm.
One Cent coins and 25 mm. Three Cents coins of his
own designs using his metallic composition. Although
he was not successful in getting the U.S. mint to adopt
his alloy, his coins are widely viewed as Hard Times
Tokens.
Hard times gradually faded as the stronger banks ac-
cumulated gold and silver to back their paper notes. By
1842 redemption was back to normal.
Collecting Hard Times Tokens is FUN! Many com-
mon Hard Times Tokens tell interesting stories about
Andrew Jackson and other colorful historic characters.
185
PRESIDENT’S LETTER — CAMARADERIE
Bill Eckberg
There’s an awful lot to love about our club. I love the
history behind early coppers, and I love the coins, them-
selves. As Sheldon wrote, “like good jewelry they seem
to transcend human mortality and to grow richer with
time.” Our new advertising brochure, to be introduced
at the Baltimore show in November, says “whether it’s
a Starred Reverse, a Missing Fraction Bar or a Spiked
Chin, we cherish the individuality and whimsy of the
old copper coins.” We are a society of collectors who
carry on the tradition of study and fellowship. The edge
of our 50" anniversary medal reads: HISTORY, FEL-
LOWSHP, EDUCATION. To me, and I would guess to
most of you, that 1s what coin collecting 1s about.
We collect the most interesting coins the United States
Mint ever produced. They were the first coins made for
circulation, and throughout their time they were the
money of the people. Sure, some of them are primi-
tive, but even those have beautiful artistry. All that were
made before the Mint became mechanized have a hand-
made charm to them that many appreciate.
We have sane and consistent grading standards, un-
like the rest of American numismatics. And, may I add
that we are far more interested in the coin and its beauty
and charm than we are in the number on a little piece of
paper in a plastic slab.
Almost all of us are collegial and like one another.
We make opportunities to get together and enjoy one
another’s company.
With very few exceptions, we are and have always
been inclusive.
We have some in our club who have gone the extra
A group of South Florida EACers at an informal dinner
get-together. We do this almost every month. Our spouses
were at an adjacent table. From left to right: Mark
Singer, Bill Eckberg, Greg Hannigan, Denis Loring, Lou
Alfonso, Bevin Beaudet, Carl Feldman, Wayne Pomeroy
and (only partly visible) Bill Buxton.
Photo courtesy of Cecelia and Greg Hannigan.
mile to bring in new members by paying their dues.
We are the only specialty club in U.S. numismatics
that puts on an annual convention.
Every year, several of our members support our edu-
cational imperative as a 501(c)(3) by presenting exhibits
or educational seminars at our convention and at other
national and regional meetings.
We have many members who contribute to our edu-
cational imperative as a 501(c)(3) by writing articles in
Penny-Wise and other periodicals and thereby promote
early copper collecting.
You’d think a// coin clubs would be inclusive. Isn’t
that the way to make new members feel welcome? Isn’t
it also the way to make long-time members want to stay
active? But some other clubs are far less inclusive. Want
to join the Bust Half Nut Club, which specializes in U.S.
half dollar coins from 1794-1836? You need to be spon-
sored by a member and have at least 100 varieties to
join. If you only collect the Flowing Hair and Draped
Bust varieties, they’ll let you in with a sponsor and 30
varieties. The Fly/In Club, for specialists in the Flying
Eagle and Indian Head cents that replaced our beloved
large cents, don’t even give the last names of their mem-
bers.
I’m glad that EAC doesn’t require sponsorship or min-
imum collection sizes or promote semi-anonymity of
our members. We become friends. We WANT to know
who each other are and what each other’s interests are.
The key word is CAMARADERIE. The friendships
we make are what many of us enjoy the most about the
club. The camaraderie and inclusiveness of our club are
things that everyone seems to note about us.
Most of all, I appreciate collectors and numismatists
like all of us in EAC, who understand the value of real
HISTORY, FELLOWSHIP, and EDUCATION.
186
MINUTES OF THE 2019 SUMMER ANA/EAC MEETING
Rosemont, IL - August 16, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by Re-
gion 5 Secretary Carol Consolo. As is tradition, a round
of introductions followed.
Garrett Ziss was commended for his effort in setting
up our club table. This year the look was stepped up
with a table banner and easel showing our club benefits.
New brochures and applications were available.
A thank you went out to Frank Noel who coordinated
the members who gave their time at the table to greet
prospective and current members.
A mention was made that the club was still in need
of a new treasurer, starting in May, 2020. If interested,
please contact a Board member.
A notable announcement was made by Chuck Heck
and Brad Karoleff that EAC and JCRS have reconciled
and will be collaborating at future events.
The Hannigans spoke about encouraging young peo-
ple to look into the enjoyment of coin collecting. They
have sponsored many memberships for youth and have
used social media to communicate.
Chuck Heck spoke about his research of the Charles
E. Moellering collection of 1794 U.S. Large Cents.
It was suggested that future EAC meetings have an
educational speaker or presentation.
We were reminded of the upcoming Goldberg Auc-
tions:
The Westwood Collection (September 1, 2019) and
The Douglas F. Bird Collection, The Great Pacific
Collection, The Nancy & Bryan Collection, and The
Widok Collection (February 16, 2020.)
The next EAC Convention is scheduled for Pittsburgh,
PA April 30 — May 3, 2020.
Respectfully submitted,
Carol M. Consolo
Region 5 Secretary
Roster of Attendees
Lucas Baldridge Austin, TX Ken Seholm Beaumont, TX
David Consolo Chagrin Falls, OH Franklin Noel Minneapolis, MN
Carol Consolo Chagrin Falls, OH Brad Karoleff Cincinnati, OH
Denis Loring Palm Beach Gardens, FL Charles Hurwing Walton, IL
Chuck Heck Bluffton, SC Leo Courshon Park Forest, IL
George Trostel Southington, CT John Berger Dallas, TX
Bill McMahon Buffalo, NY Chuck Stewart Dallas, TX
Mark Wieclew New Lenox, IL Paul Hybert Chicago, IL
David G. Gumm Arlington Hts, IL Garett Ziss West Chester, PA
Greg Hannigan Royal Palm Beach, FL Rich Uhrich Sebring, FL
Cecelia Hannigan Royal Palm Beach, FL Ken Bressett Colorado Springs, CO
Rod Widok Barrington, IL Philip Bressett Colorado Springs, CO
John Hoskins Boulder, CO Sherwood Clay Boulder, CO
Jon Lusk Ypsilanti, MI Pierre Fricke Alamo Heights, TX
Jim Neiswinter Franklin Square, NY Kellen Hoard Seattle, WA
Buck Burgess Yorba Linda, CA Ron Shintaku Long Beach, CA
Michael T. Shutterfly Glen Allen, VA
187
REGION 5 EAC MEETING
Dublin, Ohio, August 31, 2019
Attendees:
David Consolo Auburn, OH
Carol Consolo Auburn, OH
Jack D. Young Dayton, OH
Michael Schmidt Portland, IN
Maggie Matuska Heath, OH
Beth Matuska Heath, OH
Jackie Matuska Heath, OH
Rob Matuska Heath, OH
Emily Matuska Heath, OH
Gerry Tebben Columbus, OH
John Sachsen Celina, OH
Carol M. Consolo called the Ohio State Coin Show —
EAC Region 5 Meeting to order at 9 AM. AIl attendees
introduced themselves and mentioned their individual
collecting passions.
Kind words and a moment of respect were offered as
we learned of the passing of fellow EAC member, Eric
Fix.
While brochures, fliers, and copies of Penny-Wise
were available in the meeting room, Carol drew atten-
tion to the expanded display and articles in the Bourse
Room at the Consolo Coins table #344.
Jack Young was present to conduct the Educational
Presentation portion of our meeting. Jack had just re-
ceived a well-deserved award for his efforts at working
with Federal agents in identifying counterfeit coins—
mostly Early Copper—and working to bring the per-
petrators to justice. Jack displayed obverse and reverse
copies of six counterfeit 1806 half cents, all from the
same host coin. In addition, for our viewing pleasure,
he had several slabbed counterfeit coppers which had
fooled the third party grading services. He discussed the
progression of the production of the half cent, including
the efforts taken to mask the telltale diagnostics of the
original host coin.
Emily Matuska (our resident metallurgical expert) and
Michael Schmidt had a fun discussion of the weight of
various trace-elements said to have been used in produc-
ing the counterfeit coins.
In addition, there was a discussion of the importance
of knowing the provenance and history of any particular
collector coin. A coin with a known provenance going
back 20 or more years would antedate the current plague
of counterfeits. Our thanks to Jack!
David Consolo shared his interest in the fine-tuning of
Die Varieties into Die States, for example, the various
die states of the 1797 C-1 half cent.
The question of future EAC annual meetings was an-
swered:
- 2020 in Pittsburgh, PA (April 30, to May 3)
- 2021 in Washington DC (March 11-14)
- 2022 in St. Louis, MO
The meeting was adjourned at 9:41AM.
Respectfully submitted,
David B.Consolo
Asst. Secretary Region 5
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK K OK
188
EAC REGION-7 MEETING MINUTES FROM SEPT 6, 2019
Dennis Fuoss
Attendees:
Ron Shintaku (Long Beach, CA)
Dennis Fuoss (San Clemente, CA)
Dane Nielsen (Ventura, CA)
Bll Noyes (Cape Cod, MA)
Fred Truex (North Hills, CA)
Dan Demeo (Torrance, CA)
Phil Moore (Sherwood Forest, CA)
Tom Reynolds (Omaha, NE)
Paul Dofton (Huntington Beach, CA)
Chairman Ron Shintaku called the meeting to order a
few minutes past 6:30PM.
Unlike past meetings, there was a conflict with a Heri-
tage auction session for this meeting (Heritage was sell-
ing the Poulos Family collection in an adjacent meeting
room). The auction did not appear to impact our atten-
dance severely, so the members present either placed
their bids on-line ahead of the sale, or had a proxy in the
auction room.
The first topic of discussion involved the recently con-
cluded auction of the Don Stoebner coins (Don sold a
full Sheldon set with Heritage in conjunction with this
Long Beach Expo). It was noted that many of the coins
brought lower bids than they had achieved at previous
auction appearances. This is not shocking to market par-
ticipants who have been following the action in sales of
EAC-style coins in recent sales. The focus appears to
have shifted to highest possible condition (grade), and
away from coins with any problems severe enough to
prevent straight numerical grades from a TPG (third-
party grading company). As Bill stated it so eloquently,
the lesson here 1s “Condition, Condition, Condition)!
There are a number of collectors working on Red
Book variety sets of various kinds. These collectors are
generally looking for mid-to-high grade problem-free,
attractive coins. It was estimated that the total number
of EAC members currently “consciously” working on
full Sheldon sets is less than two dozen (anecdotal info).
Numbers like this do not bode well for prices for R5
coins (with populations up to 75) unless the coins are
NICE.
The recently completed Goldberg auction of the West-
wood Collection middle-date cents was also discussed at
length. For this auction, it was generally felt that many
coins sold for extremely low bids. The reasons debated
in a lively discussion. In most cases, the condition (or
grade) of the coins was NOT the issue — this collection
consisted of lots of NICE pieces, with many in the con-
dition census for the variety. It was speculated that the
auctioneers might have limited participation by mailing
the catalogs quite late (some members reported receiv-
ing the catalog the same week as the sale). The hurricane
that threatened the Florida Atlantic coast probably dis-
rupted the travel plans for some would-be participants.
There was some discussion about the ongoing popular-
ity of middle-date cent collecting by Newcomb variety
A number of members are intimidated by the high prices
of certain “stopper” varieties (1822 N14, 1825 N5, 1830
NQ). This reality can result in people turning to date sets
and/or Red Book variety sets.
It was reported that there will be at least 11 large ear-
ly copper collections (or holdings) sold in the next 12
months. Demographics play a large role in this trend,
as EAC members continue to age. Other possible fac-
tors are life decisions (change in collecting direction,
retirement, etc.) and changes in the coin market (more
on-line selling, and fewer coin shops & shows to attend
in person). The next year appears to present some major
opportunities to copper coin buyers!
A lengthy discussion of upcoming EAC conventions
then followed. The 2020 convention will be in Pitts-
burgh. The dates are April 30 to May 3, 2020. Atten-
dance is expected to be good for this EAC, due to the
location and the dates (which are similar to conventions
of the recent past). The 2021 convention will be locat-
ed in Washington, D.C. and the dates will move up to
Mar 11 — 14, 2021. The reason for the change in date is
thought to be for better hotel room rates. It was reported
that the hotel will still want more than $200 per night
[this is not correct - Ed.|, which did not meet with un1-
versal approval. There are concerns about D.C. weather
in March (which 1s hard to predict). The District does
offer numerous cultural attractions outside the numis-
matic realm. The location for the 2022 convention has
not been decided at this time. Dallas, TX has been men-
tioned, but there are other candidates. Most notable for
other sites is St. Louis [St Louis has been selected for
the 2022 convention - Ed.|. The 2007 convention was
held in St. Louis, at a hotel near the airport. This has
been considered one of the “best” of the recent EAC
meetings (of course, the tour of the Eric Newman library
did not hurt in that regard). It was noted that Heritage (in
Dallas) is in the process of relocating their headquarters
from downtown Dallas to a location closer to the airport.
There could be opportunities for synergy, if the EAC
189
convention should happen to choose venues that have
existing relationships with Heritage numismatics. This
is all speculative, at this time.
We were treated to a featured speaker for this meeting.
Dane Nielsen is a long-ttme EAC’ er (member number <
100). He regaled us with many stories from the “classi-
cal period” for early copper collecting (ie. The 1960’s
and 1970’s). It seemed back then like R5 & R6 variet-
ies were “falling off trees” to be plucked up by eager
aficionados. Prices were ridiculously low, by today’s
standards. However, the camaraderie in EAC sounded
quite familiar — we are very fortunate that this aspect of
copper collecting has stayed with us through the years!
Dane reported that his Sheldon-series coins were sold
to provide the capital needed to finance a home in Ven-
tura, CA (and he still lives in that home). Upon returning
to copper collecting, Dane found that Red Book variet-
ies from the challenging years (1816-1829) suited his
budget and his collecting tendencies perfectly. A show-
n-tell coin (a wonderful mint-state 1817 N-16 / 15-star
variety) was the capper for Dane’s presentation.
Dane closed his remarks by suggesting that Ventura,
CA could be an ideal venue for a future West Coast EAC
meeting. He made a pretty compelling case, from beach-
front hotel locations, to cultural amenities close to the
venue and loads of good eateries and night spots also
close by. The one difficulty (obviously) is the distance
from Ventura to LAX airport. However, there could be
any number of creative solutions to this “little hitch”
(hired town cars, shuttles, etc.)
The meeting was adjourned after about an hour & 20
minutes.
7 CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK Kk OK OK
SAVE THE DATES FOR FUTURE EAC CONVENTIONS
2020 EAC Convention — Pittsburgh, PA
Dates: Thursday, April 30 to Sunday, May 3, 2020
Convention Co-Chairmen: Chris Pretsch (pretsch@
staleycap.com) and Tom Nist (pennyless1857@
gmail.com)
Pittsburgh Marriott City Center
112 Washington Place
Pittsburgh, PA, 15219-3458
(412) 471-4000
2021 EAC Convention — Washington, DC
Dates: Thursday, March 11 — Sunday, March 14, 2021
NOTE EARLIER THAN USUAL DATES in 2021!!!
Washington Hilton
1919 Connecticut Avenue
Washington, DC 20009
(202-483-3000)
2022 EAC Convention — St. Louis, MO
Dates: Thursday, May 12 to Sunday, May 15, 2022
Convention Chairman: Bob Kebler (rskdrk1985@
sbcglobal.net)
St. Louis Hilton Airport
10330 Natural Bridge Rd.
St. Louis, MO 63134
Your Board is soliciting proposals for the 2023 con-
vention. The 2017-2021 conventions are all held in the
Northeast quadrant of the US. More than half of our
membership lives in that quadrant of the country. Most
aspects of the conventions are easy, as we have the ex-
perience of having done this for 50 years. If you are in-
terested in hosting, the local host’s main duties are to
pick the venue, arrange for security and select the food
for the reception.
The most important criteria for a venue include: 1) a
ballroom large enough for the bourse. It must be at least
6500 sq. ft. and 8000 sq. ft. 1s better. 2) proximity to air
travel. For security, dealers with inventory do not want
to travel far from an airport. 3) proximity to interesting
side trips. 4) dates must not conflict with Easter, Pass-
over, Mothers’ Day or the Central States convention.
If you are interested in hosting, please contact Bill
Eckberg (halfcent@mac.com) to discuss your ideas.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK Kk K K OK
EAC MEMBERS WIN AWARDS AT A.N.A.
Two EAC members were honored by different groups
at the recently-completed A.N.A. in Rosemont, Illinois.
Bill Eckberg, in a piece produced by Charles Morgan
for CoinWeek.com, received the Numismatic Literary
Guild Award for “Best Audio-Visual Program: Long
Video.” Reflecting his recent research as published in
both Penny-Wise and The Numismatist, his presentation
was titled, “1792—-A Hub Story: How the First U. S.
Mint Coinage Dies Were Made.”
Jack Young, founder of the Facebook anti-counterfeit
group The Dark Side, received the third annual Alan
Kreuzer Memorial Award from the Professional Numis-
190
matists Guild’s Anti Counterfeiting Educational Foun-
dation, for his work in combating numismatic-related
fraud and thievery. Named for the late Alan Kreuzer, a
California coin dealer who was instrumental in alerting
the hobby to fake third-party certification holders and
labels, the Anti-Counterfeiting Task Force was estab-
lished in 2016 with a $50,000 contribution from Kreu-
zer’s daughter Chandra.
Congratulations to both Bill and Jack!
--Editor.
7 CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK K OK
EAC 2020 PREVIEW
Chris F. Pretsch and Tom Nist
It’s not too early to start planning for the next con-
vention. Following the very successful Dayton show is
going to be tough but we’re going to try to host a great
show in 2020. The 2020 EAC Convention will be held
from April 29 — May 3" at the Marriot City Center
in downtown Pittsburgh. The EAC room rate is $159/
night. The hotel is centrally located to many cultural 1n-
stitutions that Pittsburgh has to offer. Some of the attrac-
tions that you might want to consider are:
Carnegie Museum of Natural History
Carnegie Museum of Natural History, one of the
four Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh, is among the
top natural history museums in the country. It main-
tains, preserves, and interprets an extraordinary collec-
tion of artifacts, objects, and scientific specimens used
to broaden understanding of evolution, conservation,
and biodiversity. Carnegie Museum of Natural History
generates new scientific knowledge, advances science
literacy, and inspires visitors of all ages to become pas-
sionate about science, nature, and world cultures. The
Carnegie also preserves the George Clapp collection of
Early American Coppers!
Carnegie Museum of Art
Carnegie Museum of Art is arguably the first museum
of contemporary art in the United States, collecting the
“Old Masters of tomorrow” since the inception of the
Carnegie International in 1896. Today, the museum 1s
one of the most dynamic major art institutions in Amer-
ica. The collection of more than 30,000 objects features
a broad spectrum of visual arts, including painting and
sculpture; prints and drawings; photographs; architec-
tural casts, renderings, and models; decorative arts and
design; and film, video, and digital imagery. Through
programming, exhibitions, and publications, the mu-
seum frequently explores the role of art and artists in
confronting key social issues of our time, combining
and juxtaposing local and global perspectives. With its
unique history and resources, the museum strives to be-
come a leader in defining the role of art museums for the
21st century.
Phipps Conservatory
A green oasis in the middle of Pittsburgh’s vibrant
Oakland neighborhood, Phipps Conservatory and
Botanical Gardens has provided a world-class garden
experience to its visitors since 1893. Explore the beauty
and wonders of nature at Phipps, encompassing 15 acres
including a 14-room glasshouse and 23 distinct gardens.
Experience industry-leading sustainable architecture
and green practices, stunning seasonal flower shows,
exclusive commissioned exhibits, renowned orchid and
bonsai collections and more. This historic landmark is
just a few miles from downtown Pittsburgh in Schenley
Park.
The Heinz History Center
The Senator John Heinz History Center traces its roots
back to 1879, making it the oldest cultural institution
in Western Pennsylvania. In 1879, the Old Residents
of Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania established a
historical society to help preserve local history. Five
years later, the name changed to the Historical Society
of Western Pennsylvania and has been in continuous
existence for more than 135 years. Known now as the
Senator John Heinz History Center, the museum system
includes the Western Pennsylvania Sports Museum, the
Thomas & Katherine Detre Library & Archives, the Fort
Pitt Museum, Meadowcroft Rockshelter and Historic
Village, and the Museum Conservation Center.
The Andy Warhol Museum
Located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the place of
Andy Warhol’s birth, The Andy Warhol Museum holds
the largest collection of Warhol’s artworks and archival
materials. The Warhol is one of the most comprehen-
sive single-artist museums in the world and the largest
in North America.
We will be putting some excursions together that will
probably include some of these destinations. Feedback
and ideas from EAC members are always welcome.
Dealer tables are selling fast but we still have some
left. If you would like a table contract, please email
Chris at pretsch@staleycap.com and I will get one over
to you.
19]
EAC PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE
EAC is a club with many talented members who do
interesting research projects related to early copper and
the early days of the United States Mint. Yet, EAC has
never promoted the publication of such books. Indeed,
the only book ever published by EAC was the Grad-
ing Guide for Early American Copper Coins by Bill
Eckberg, Bob Fagaly, Dennis Fuoss and Ray Williams,
and that was done without established procedures and
practices. Most recently, Bill Eckberg’s book, The Half
Cent, 1793-1857: The Story of Americas Greatest Little
Coin, was published by EAC, but without any financial
contribution from the club.
The committe consists of Harry Salyards, Editor of
Penny-Wise, Lou Alfonso, EAC Treasurer, Bill Eckberg,
EAC President and Steve Carr. Others who volunteer to
participate are welcome.
We believe that formal procedures and parameters for
EAC publishing projects need to be developed and pro-
moted to keep early copper in the minds of collectors,
and initial thoughts wre presented at the meeting at the
EAC convention in Dayton. Like the publications com-
mittee of C4, our group would assist with editing and
EAC would provide financial support for the project.
At this point, we invite potential authors to make pro-
posals to the committee.
Do you have one? We are ready to help.
* CK OK CK CK OK KK CK KK KK K K OK
CANDIDATES FOR MEMBERSHIP
The following candidates have applied for membership in EAC since the last issue of Penny-Wise. Provided that no
adverse comments on any particular individual are received by the Membership Committee before the January 2020
issue of P-W, all will be declared elected to full membership at that time. Chairman of the Membership Committee
is Bim Gander, 12770 NW Steelhead Falls Drive, Terrebonne, OR 97760.
New Members
Name City, State Member #
Jack Smith Chicago, IL 6693J
Oggie Stacheberg New York, NY 6694]
Timothy A. Bernau Freeland, MI 6695
Marc Dugan Dayton, OH 6696
Robert Dever Canton, MA 6697
Scott Paganolli Georgetown, MA 6698
Sullivan Labno Apple Valley, MN 6699J
Rory Blake Lancaster, PA 6700
Randy P. Seitz Franklin, PA 6701
Chris Powell Yorktown, VA 6702
Matthew Dawn Crystal Lake, IL 6703
Gary Scott Madison, WI 6704
Josh Smith Circleville, OH 6705
Matthew Black Alpena, MI 6706
Jason Rodgers Temperance, MI 6707
David Porta Wayne, MI 6708
Joseph K. Mulcahey Medway, MA 6709
James Groom Manitou Beach, MI 6710
Patrick Bain Watertown, SD 6711
Alan Laughters Telford, TN 6712
Karl Fillauer Chattanooga, TN 6713
David Bills Port Byron, IL 6714
Eyan Tiemann Princeton, IL 6715J
192
Rod L. Braughton
Paul J. Dofton
John M. Bordelon
James E. Stewart
Richard A. Frost
Rejoining Members
Morgan Hill, CA
Huntington Beach, CA
London, TN
Wheaton IL
Vidor, TX
3010
3419
4621
5144
5786
* CK OK CK OK OK CK CK KK KK K KK OK
DANSCO LARGE CENT DECODER RING
Bob Fagaly
While most of us desire to collect a complete Sheldon and/or Newcomb set, budgetary constraints limit our
aspirations. A much easier aspiration 1s to assemble a date set. A Red Book variety set would be much more ambitions
(and costly). An intermediate goal would be to complete the Dansco Large Cents 1792-1857 Album (#7099). To aid
in the search, below is listing of the Dansco listed varieties and their corresponding Sheldon/Newcomb numbers.
Date type He
1793 Chain 1-4
1793 Wreath 5-11
1793 Lib Cap 12-16
1794 17-72
1795 73-80
1796 Lib Ca 81-91
1796 Draped Bust 92-119
1797 120-143
1798 144-187
1799 188-189
1800 190-212
1801 213-224
1802 225-242
1803 243-26
1804 66
1805 267-269
1806 0
1807 271-276
1808 277-279
1809 280
1810 281-285
1811 286-287
1812 288-291
1813 292-293
1814 294-295
1816 any
1817 any
1818 any
1819 any
1820 any
1821 any
1822 any
1823 an
1824 Normal Date 2-
1825 el
1826 Normal Date 1,3-7,9
1827 any
1828 ay
1829 Large Letters 1-2,4,6-8
1829 Med. Letters 3,5,9
1830 Large Letters 1-5,7-11
1830 Med. Letters 6
1831] Large Letters 1,6-12,14
1831 Med. Letters 2-5
1832 Large Letters 3
1832 Med. Letters 1-2
1833 any
1834 any
Pd ed po pe feo pe fe fo pe fh jo jo peek joo jee foe joel poh poh
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 OO
BD BB BUG UI GO GOI GI GG GO Ga GO
=DODOOOOO CBHYNAYIAINAN Anna
a
NO
type
Lg. 8, stars & rev. ltrs
Sm. 8 & stars med. ltrs.
Lg. 8 Sm. stars, med. ltrs
Sm. 8 Lg stars, med. ltrs.
Lg. 8 & Stars
Sm. 8 & Stars
Head of ‘36
Pl. crd. med. Itrs.
Pl. crd. Sm. Itrs.
Head of ‘38
Head of ‘38 Beaded Cord
Silly Hea
Booby Head
Petite Head
Large Date
Small Date
Sm. Dt. Lg. 18
Small Date
Small Date
Large Date
Petite Sm. Itrs.
Petite Le. ltrs.
Mature Lg. Itrs.
Over 81 (error)
Small Date
Medium Date
Tall Date
7 Over “‘sm.”’ 7
Normal Date
Over 81 (error)
as ht 5’s
Slanting 5’s
Slanting 5’s Knob on Ear
Upright 5
Slanting 5
Large Date
Small Date
je)
=)
ws \S
co NENA BN
ss caer ae
>
—
a
—
1S)
=)
Nea BRR VW
—_
(oes
15
me
Ne eRe ©
Nr
MY STORY
Ken Laymon
How did I come to collecting large cents?
The short answer: I made a decision to extend my col-
lection of small cents, to include an example of every
U.S. cent minted since 1793. It seemed a natural pro-
gression.
The long answer is more convoluted and circuitous,
beginning in the 1950s when I was a school kid.
From the time I was in elementary school, I collect-
ed—anything and everything: baseball cards, comic
books, marbles, and yes, coins. I loved Lincoln cents.
I also loved Indian cents and Buffalo nickels. (Western
culture was front and center, and what better exempli-
fied that culture than Indians and buffaloes?) The coins
could be found in circulation, at least most dates and
mints, and I started filling those little blue Whitman
folders. I was hooked.
By the time I was in high school, I was frequenting
the local coin shops to acquire pieces I had not found in
circulation. The Indians had developed the most allure,
in part because they were older—older than my parents,
older than my grandparents, even older than the stuff we
were reading about in history class. These small cents
were indeed little pieces of that history.
As I collected the coins, I started learning more about
them. I read books; I read magazines. My high school
biology teacher was Sol Taylor, future author of The
Standard Guide to the Lincoln Cent. When he wasn’t
telling us that it was a good thing we didn’t all look like
what we ate, or we would all look like potato chips, he
was talking to us about his childhood, growing up in
New York and collecting Lincoln “pennies.” My parents
gave me a Red Book for my fifteenth birthday (which
had pictures of huge, earlier cents that all looked similar,
and yet somehow different). The dealer from whom they
bought the book gave me my first copper-nickel Indian
as a birthday gift, an 1859 with that different reverse. It
graded VG and had been cleaned, but it was the oldest
cent I had, and boy was I proud of it.
Then something happened. It’s called life. I wanted
to go to college, which meant I needed to spend more
time studying math, chemistry, and physics and less
time collecting and studying coins. So I set my collec-
tion aside. Off to college I went. Then it was marriage
and career pursuits, a house to fix up and a yard to land-
scape. Something close to twenty years later, I found
myself wondering what ever happened to my old coin
collection. I recalled giving it to my brother at one point,
but as it turned out, he had done nothing with it. He had
not really become interested in it; he had not added any
pieces to it; in fact, surprisingly, he had not sold it! It
was still sitting in mom’s living room cabinet where I
had left it. So, I reacquired it.
As I reentered the realm of collecting, I decided to fo-
cus on a type set of U.S. coins, in addition to completing
the small-copper cent collection and the Buffalo date
set. As I studied all of the beautiful U.S. coin designs, I
was constantly drawn back to the copper issues. There
was just something special about them. I loved adding
more small cents to the collection, if for no other reason
than that they were copper. So I completed the Buffalo
nickel set, enjoyed it for a while, and then sold it. With
the pursuit of a type set well in hand, I then began look-
ing more seriously at the copper cents, especially the
early ones that looked about the same but were some-
how different. I started with my library!
I began acquiring books, pamphlets, auction catalogs
and other literature, everything I could find about the
early large cents. I read all I could find. I had acquired
an 1803 large cent from a Chicago dealer just so I could
hold one in my hand; but for every large cent I pur-
chased, I must have acquired five books. Both my cent
collection and my library were growing.
Then sometime during the 1990s, Numismatic News
held a contest. Answer some questions about early large
cents, and you could win a year’s membership to. . .(a
little drum roll here, please). . .EAC. Well, I answered
the questions (looking some of them up) and entered the
contest. A short while later, I was told I had answered
the questions correctly and had won the contest. I was
now an EAC member!
Since that time, my cent collection has continued to
grow, along with my library. I had already begun adding
the old copper large cents by date, thinking that if I could
acquire an example from each year, I would effectively
complete the set of cents that I had started so long ago
as a kid. And that would be cool. When I finally had a
cent for each year, save 1815 of course, I just had to add
some varieties. I chose to follow the Red Book. Sheldon
and Newcomb varieties seemed out of the question, so
the Red Book it was. Or was it? Could I not simply pick
a specific date or area of interest and collect all of the
known varieties therein? Of course I could. Many others
have and do.
194
So, where am I today? I own a complete set of U.S.
cents from 1793 to present (business strikes by date,
mint and major type). I continue to upgrade pieces in
my Indian set and add varieties of large cents when I
can. My type set sits in the bank vault; I pull it out now
and then to remind myself of all the beautiful U.S. coin
designs. But my passion rests increasingly with the large
cents, those beautiful old coppers. As time has gone on,
I find myself drawn toward the Transitional Head large
cents, Kneass-Gobrecht and company. I don’t know
why, exactly. I guess they’re just beautiful old copper
coins that I find interesting, and that’s a good enough
reason.
Iam no longer a kid growing up in the 1950s and ‘60s,
but it seems I never lost the collecting passion. Several
years ago, I started collecting leather baseball gloves
from the 1950s. There was just something about the
smell, the feel, the patina of old leather. Sound familiar?
* CK OK CK OK OK OK CK KK KK KK K OK
PENNY CANDY - OR, HOW I STARTED COLLECTING COINS
Frank Ferland
I have been collecting copper coins since finding a
particular Lincoln Cent in the spring of 1961. Home
from school, mom had given me a nickel to run out and
buy my daily candy bar. Much to the annoyance of the
cashier at the neighborhood market, I was in the habit
of exchanging nickels for pennies, checking for needed
dates before buying a Milky Way candy bar, always a
Milky Way. What a dilemma when I spotted a 1914-
D, recognized immediately as one missing from my
collection. Not having more than five cents, keeping the
penny meant sacrificing the ever-satisfying Milky Way.
The decision to keep an “S” mint coin would have been
easier. I had learned in my eighteenth edition of R.S.
Yeoman’s Blue Book, a gift from a family friend, that
Lincolns minted in San Francisco are generally more
elusive than those struck in Philadelphia or Denver. The
modest urge to keep a mere teens dated “D” mint cent
finally prevailed over a satisfying sugar fix when the
store clerk’s impatience spread to those in the check out
line being held up by a boy conflicted over pennies or
candy. Later in life it became apparent the choice made
was in character, but at the moment it left me hungry
and ambivalent until I ran home delighted to find a Blue
Book value of thirteen dollars and fifty cents for a 1914-
D in very good condition. Proudly, I became the only
kid at school, or in our small NH town for that matter,
with a key date Lincoln.
After years of collector inactivity, I foolishly sold my
Lincoln Cent collection in the mid 1970s when my wife
and I started collecting stamps, a misguided interlude,
the stamps not my wife, lasting a short while. In the late
1980s, I returned to collecting coins; this time in the
form of raw, mint state silver dollars, which like stamps
proved to be another unwise, impulsive sojourn.
Finally, in April, 1988, as a forty year old, I bought
four late date large cents, proof of Sheldon’s prophecy
that collectors eventually turn to early copper. For three
years increasing enthusiasm for large cents led me to
a few well-known dealers and EAC. In early 1991, I
noticed a few Hard Time Tokens listed on Rod Burress’
price list. Curious, I soon learned that HTTs had been
added to the scope of EAC ten years prior, and that the
series included many pieces with a direct reference to
period history. After purchasing my first seven HTTs
from Rod that spring I put coin collecting aside in favor
of paying tuition costs until returning in 2009. Since
then I have focused on HTTs. With their irresistible
connection to American history, Hard Times Tokens
became my passion, and today my collection consists
of 229 varieties or different die states including 131 of
Lyman Low’s 183 numbered varieties.
A little over one year ago I sold my large cents
while continuing to add elusive new HTT varieties and
expanding a less advanced collection of colonial coins.
So, as one can see, the collector bug is alive and well,
although it has evolved. Of the over 300 tokens or coins
in my cabinet, only one, a 1914 D Lincoln cent is or ever
has been official U.S. currency. The Lincoln cent was
added a decade ago, in condition and color as close as
I can remember to the one I found as a twelve year old.
Who can deny, maybe the prize coin of my youth has
returned to me. Since retiring from employment a few
years ago, I have also taken to preparing a catalog of my
collection complete with pictures and explanations of
historical events referenced by the devices and legends
on each piece. The title of the document, Penny Candy,
is a reminder of the experience that perhaps more than
any other affected my persistence in the hobby of Kings.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK K OK
195
STRAWBERRY LEAVES FOREVER
Bill Eckberg
Let me take you down — to a controversy for over 150
years about whether the Strawberry Leaf cents were
patterns, counterfeits, reengraved cents or regular issue
coins meant for circulation;. The wretched condition of
nearly all survivors contributed to the controversy, the
history of which is well-described by Kleeberg', who
believed at the time they were counterfeits. After his pa-
per was published, the edge devices of all of the known
Strawberry Leaf cents were compared with those of oth-
er Wreath cents, leading to the conclusion that the coins
were most likely issues of the U.S. Mint’.
Bill Maryott later digitally reconstructed the Straw-
berry Leaf obverse by copying leaves, numbers and let-
ters on the reverses of the other varieties, giving further
evidence that the Strawberry Leaf cents were legitimate
Mint products’.
My recent discovery that the Wreath cent dies were
created from a hub* provided a unique opportunity to
test whether the Strawberry Leaf cents were Mint prod-
ucts. Since that paper appeared, several major collec-
tions have appeared at auction that had even higher
resolution images that have allowed me to refine the hub
model. In particular, the new findings show clearly that
Ms. Liberty’s hair in the hub flowed in tresses that were
Figure 1. Wreath cent hub recreation.
1 Kleeberg, John M. 1998. The Strawberry Leaf cent: a
reappraisal. p. 35 In Americas Large Cent, John M. Klee-
berg, ed. American Numismatic Society, New York.
2 Neiswinter, Jim. 2005. The Strawberry meeting. Penny-
Wise XXXIX, 44.
3 Maryott, Bill. 2009. Further investigation of the 1793
Strawberry cents. Penny-Wise XLIII, 78.
4 Eckberg, Bill. 2017. Hubbed 1793 obverse dies. Penny-
Wise LI, 65.
modified in each working die by engraving individual
hairs. Figure 1 shows the improved model of the Wreath
hub.
I also tested the hub against the finest known Straw-
berry Leaf (a VG NC-3). The image of that coin was
developed from the photo on CoinFacts.com, which ap-
pears to have been taken from a photo used in the 2009
Stack’s Orlando Sale. As the photo was taken under pre-
sumably quite different conditions than those used for
the photos from which the hub model developed, some
photographic artifacts were expected. Surprisingly, the
match was perfect (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Overlay of Wreath cent hub and the finest
known NC-3. The correpondence is excellent.
This study conclusively demonstrates that the Straw-
berry Leaf cents were produced from the same hub that
created all of the other Wreath cents. In addition to the
face and bust, nearly all of the hair of the NC-3 perfectly
matches that of the recreated hub, because any individu-
ally engraved hairs have worn down leaving only the the
masses in the hub.
The Strawberry Leaf cents were genuine products of
the U.S. Mint, almost certainly intended for circulation.
Fortunately, since the trefoil leaves appear on every
Wreath reverse, everyone who owns a Wreath cent owns
one with strawberry leaves. Living is easy!
196
HODGEPODGE 1: FINDING AN 1803-S264 (R4+) AND 1806 C-3 (R6)
Howard Spencer Pitkow
Introduction
It’s acurious thing. You can go several months or most
of a year without finding a significant half cent or large
cent. I found myself in that position when I published
“Musings of a Copper Collector” in P-W (April 2018).
In that essay, I discussed the different phases of my nu-
mismatic collecting career, as well as a certain whim-
sical feeling: “I have often pondered how many other
EAC’ ers have found themselves in a similar position of
feeling that the well has started to try up or slow down
to an ever diminishing trickle.” In other words my days
of finding or buying sought-after varieties at reasonable
prices were on the wane as I continued to transition into
American colonial and foreign coins.
Not so fast, Howard! All of a sudden in the last six
months I have either found or traded for four significant
large cent and three significant half cent varieties, as fol-
lows:
1-1803 S-264 (GS) (R4+)
2-1806 C-3 (AG3) (R6)
3-1796 S-82 (VG8) (R5)
4-1793 C-2 (G6) (R3)
5-1807/6 S-272 (FR2) (R4+)
6-1797 C-3c (FR2) (R7-)
7-1799 S-189 (FR2/AG3) (R2)
Four of these coppers, the S264 and the three half
cents were new and added to my Primary collection.
The other three large cents were duplicates.
Like many EAC’ers, I started pit looking for high
quality coppers. However, as the cost for high grade/
high rarity coins increased tremendously over the years,
I found myself looking for lower grade/high rarity coins.
Secondly, in order to maintain my attribution skills, as
discussed in previous P-W articles, I started buying
hoards of lower grade coppers. The combination of
these two factors enabled me, on occasion, to find rare
half cents and large cents.
In my next several articles for P-W, I will discuss the
circumstances concerning the above listed seven addi-
tions to my variety collections. In this twenty-eighth
publication I will briefly discuss the first two of my sig-
nificant finds in a more concise format.
Find No. 1: 1803 S-264 (R4+)
In February 2019, I attended the Tri-State Coin Show
(PA, NJ, DE) held at the Sheraton Bucks County Ho-
tel in Langhorne, PA. As usual I surveyed the various
bourse tables. One of the dealers, whose inventory I
rarely checked, had several hundred unattributed large
cents with only their dates haphazardly thrown around
in one of his display cases. As I started to check these
coppers I heard him talking to a prospective client that
he needed cash and was reducing some of his prices. As
I looked at an 1803 cent I net graded it as a G5, but more
importantly it had the large pointed “1” nearly touch-
ing the hair and the large round—bottomed “3” which
touched the bottom of Liberty’s drapery. Only the S-264
and S-265 have this “large date” in the 1803 series.
Ever since I acquired the S-263 and S-265, I had been
looking for the very scarce S-264. I must have looked at
well over a hundred unattributed 1803’s with no success.
With great anticipation I turned over to the worn reverse
side of this copper to inspect its diagnostics. Due to the
wear and the dealer’s refusal to let me remove the cop-
per from its hugger, I had a difficult time determining its
reverse diagnostics. However, as I examined the reverse
the best I could, I observed that the “STA” of STATES
seemed to be obliterated. Also the “1” of the fraction
appeared small as did the very worn “100” below the
fraction bar. But there was still some doubt in my mind.
The dealer informed me that he didn’t have the time
to attribute the coppers and was using the “Greysheet”’
average prices for each date’s grade. Since I felt I had a
decent chance, without rigorous inspection, I asked him
what he wanted for the coin. Since his “Greysheet” price
seemed reasonable, I paid him and hoped my instincts
were correct. Even if it wasn’t the S-264 but the S-265, I
would still be “ahead of the game” by acquiring another
worthwhile duplicate large cent.
As soon as I got home that Sunday afternoon, I set out
to determine the diagnostics by removing the coin from
its hugger. Well, to make a long story short, after intense
evaluation, EUREKA, I finally found my 1803 S-264!
This find enabled me to complete all 24 varieties includ-
ing the NC-1 for the 1803 series.
Find No. 2: 1806 C-3 (R6)
While attending the Trevose Coin Show in PA, I ob-
served two half cents in a display case. Out of curiosity
I asked the dealer to let me examine one of them—an
1806 in AG3 condition. Although very worn I could see
the “6” in the date was small and high while the stems
197
were attached to the wreath on the reverse surface. For
some reason this “rang a bell” in the depths of my mind.
Why? I wasn’t quite sure. I continued to study this cop-
per and eventually bought this low grade half cent at the
dealer’s asking price.
Later that evening, I isolated myself in my office in an
attempt to attribute which one of the four 1806 varieties
my coin represented. Of the four known 1806 varieties
there are two R1’s (C-1 and C-4), one R4 (C-2) and one
R6 (C-3) according to the 20" and last edition of Copper
Quotes by Robinson (4/30/11).
After a careful and deliberate analysis I discovered
that I indeed “lucked out” with the 1806. It was the C-3,
my 68" half cent variety.
Even more exciting, my coin has the rim break (cud)
above ICA, making it die state 3.0, per Ron Manley’s
Half Cent Die State Book. Manley noted that die states
1.0 (perfect) and 3.0 are extremely rare, state 2.0 (with
die crack but no cud at ICA) being the usual. He also
reported that the highest-graded ’06 C-3 known to him
was F12. In Jeff Noonan’s 1/200 Survey (March 2015),
only 16 ’06 C-3’s were reported,, the highest grade be-
ing a F15, with the rest no higher than VG8.
In my next article for P-W, to be entitled “Hodge-
podge 2,” I will relate for the membership two other sig-
nificant large cent finds, including how I traded one of
them in order to acquire a very low mintage and highly
desirable half cent.
' While still a rare and highly desirable variety, more
recent work suggests that as many as 45 examples exist
altogether, making it an R5, not R6. —Editor.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK KK OK
MY FIRST EAC CONVENTION
David Tortorice
I have been an EAC member for just about one year
now, and have found it to be one of the most reward-
ing experiences in my nearly forty years of collecting
coins. My collecting started around 1978, and early on
I discovered copper coinage was something special to
me. Although I collected, and still like Buffalo Nick-
els and Mercury Dimes, my Lincoln Cent album was
always my most prized compilation. Around five years
ago, I started doing some part time dealing after tak-
ing over as Bourse Chairman for our local coin club,
The Buffalo Numismatic Association. I started accumu-
lating some Large Cents, but I felt that I did not know
enough about the coins to be selling them. So, I set them
aside until I got around to buying some books and doing
some further research. In 2015, at the ANA in Chicago,
I wanted an 18" century coin to add to my collection. I
bought a 1798 S-177 Draped Bust Large Cent in Good
condition. That night back at the hotel with the coin, I
could not look at it enough. I couldn’t stop Googling
things that were popping into my head about what was
going on in the country at the time this coin was mint-
ed. At that same show, I attended a talk given by Ron
Shintaku on the Allure of Early American Copper. It
hooked me. I wanted to get back home, learn more, and
organize the coins I had. A couple of months later at a
coin show, a dealer friend of mine had bought a col-
lection of early Large Cents, though he usually deals in
ancients. When I stopped by to say hello, the tray of U.S.
Large Cents caught my eye. He told me I could have
anything I wanted for half of what he had it marked. I
chose a 1797 in Very Good condition, and an 1803 in
Fine condition. The 1797 turned out to be an S-133, and
the 1803 an S-263. My collection was starting to shape
up. I decided I was going to put together a date set from
1793-1857. In 2018, I attended the ANA in Philadelphia
with the intentions of purchasing a 1795 lettered edge
Large Cent. At that show a friend of mine from Buffalo,
Bill Mc Mahon, who had already been an EAC member
for awhile, took me around and introduced me to many
EAC dealers in search of my coin. My search ended at
Douglas Bird’s table. After striking a deal with Mr. Bird,
he took an additional twenty-five dollars off the price of
the coin to put toward an EAC membership. That same
morning I had attended my first EAC meeting as a guest
and was highly impressed at the enthusiasm, and high
energy the members brought to the meeting. Purchasing
that coin, and enjoying that historic city with my lovely
wife, made that a trip one that will forever be a favorite
memory of mine. Back home, I immediately sent in my
dues for a two year membership in EAC.
This past spring, I attended the convention in Dayton,
Ohio. There I took in everything I could, from the grad-
ing and counterfeit detection course, to the many talks
and educational seminars. I met so many new friends
who I have seen and talked to since the convention.
Just to mention a few, Steve and Jim Carr, with whom
I had the pleasure of re acquainting with this past June
at ANA Summer Seminar, where one of my instructors,
Jerry Bobbe, was also an EAC member. And Scott Bar-
rett, who has extended his knowledge and experience to
198
help in my collecting. At the convention I was amazed
to meet, or be pointed out to, many of the people that I
have read about in the Breen Encyclopedias and other
highly regarded literature on Early American Copper
Coinage. These people are celebrities to me, and getting
to attend the convention with them was very special and
exciting to me. When I returned home, I wrote about the
convention in an article that took up most of the Niagara
Frontier Coin Club’s newsletter. I would like to thank
everyone in EAC for, what I called in the beginning of
this letter, one of the most rewarding experiences 1n nu-
mismatics I have had. I look forward to contributing to
and serving the club in any capacity I can, as I under-
stand the importance of volunteering being very active
in two coin clubs in Western New York. Thanks again. I
look forward to every issue of Penny-Wise and to seeing
everyone at future conventions and coin shows around
the country.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK K OK
ADVICE FOR NEW MEMBERS, PART 6:
WHAT TO COLLECT AFTER YOU HAVE A DATE SET
Hugh Bodell
I started by collecting one from each decade and then
like most of us, a date set. Many of you are getting close
to completing a date set, perhaps still lacking a ‘93, a
‘99 or an ‘04. Before shelling out all that money for one
of the expensive ones, you may have seen other old cop-
per coins that interested you but were not on your radar.
You can now feel free to buy a second 1803 or whatever.
Those others will come. Your first major set will become
complete. The fun now begins!
What else is out there to collect into a set of large cents?
How about overdates? The large cent series offers many
of those and all but one are easy to find. How about the
four mouse head varieties of 1817? Those are internal
cuds that appear similar to a mouse in the same place on
top of the head of four different varieties. They are com-
mon enough, so be patient and find nice ones. There are
ones with blundered fractions that are common and pop-
ular. How about ones with double profiles from receiv-
ing a minor second strike (“machine doubling’)? They
are common for many varieties from 1831 through 1835
and rather rare on other dates. All triple profile ones are
rare. There are also ones with die cracks around all stars,
or bisecting obverse or reverse die cracks. Or you could
work to complete a “Redbook” set.
You could collect ones in crisp early die states or ones
struck from broken-up dies. Ones with cuds are very
popular because we never see one in our loose change.
All cuds are rare except 1806 C6 half cents, large cents
such as 1796 S-110, 1798s S-161, 173, 175 and 187,
1802 S-232, and 1816s, 1826s, 1836s and some 1831s.
Though not rare, those are all very popular. The others
are very rare and bring high bids at auction. You can also
collect die states of individual varieties. Many of us own
several 1831 N-12’s and collect different die states of
1804, 1816 N-1s, 1817 N-12s, 1817 N-17s, 1818 N-2s,
1829 N-9s, 1830 N-10s, 1831 N-8s and 1839 N-ls.
Some of us have been known to collect especially ‘93s,
‘94s, ‘96 Draped Busts, ‘98s, 1816s, 1823 restrikes,
1839s, 1844s with cuds, ‘46s, ‘47s, ‘48s, ‘49’ and 1857s.
You could collect ones with differing colors, ones with
matching colors, black and tan ones or those with misla-
beled slab inserts (not just grading differences but head
type, date or variety misidentifications). You could col-
lect same varieties with differing die rotations, like ‘16
N-2, ‘18 N-3 or ‘30 N-3. Or you could find ones with
holes or rough surfaces which are not very popular, or
ones corroded in pickle barrels which may appear stun-
ning. You could collect modern counterfeits or old, well
known counterfeits. You could collect ones with coun-
terstamps or ones that have been beaten square and pos-
sibly used for passage on the “Underground Railroad.”
You could specialize in collecting half cents, early dates,
middle dates or late dates. Or there are Hard Times to-
kens, Connecticuts, New Jerseys, Massachusetts, Fugios
or Washingtonia. You could specialize in error coins like
off-centers, multiple strikes, tab double-strikes, brock-
ages, brockage makers, ones with rim clips, misaligned
ones or ones with single or double flanged edges.
You could collect proof ones, half-proof ones, patterns,
hoard coins in mint state or a date set of late date mint
state ones. You could collect those considered so rare
they are called NC’s for Non-Collectable or those con-
sidered nc, now collectable. You could collect any that
you consider to be choice/attractive -- those are very
popular. Or just very high grade ones, or Civil War to-
kens, Conder tokens, Two Cent pieces, or just a nice one
of each early, middle and or late date variety—a lifetime
hobby.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK KK KK Ke OK
199
Letter to the Editor you announced at the annual meeting that I was
receiving the award. There is no publication in
the numismatic world that remotely equals Penny-
I am writing to express my deep appreciation Wise, and I am greatly humbled by the recognition
for the Editor’s Award that you presented to me accorded to me for my contributions to P-W. Thank
at the EAC Convention in Dayton. I was truly you so much for this wonderful honor.
surprised (stunned might be a better word) when
Bob Kebler writes,
* CK OK OK OK OK CK CK KK KK K KK OK
SWAPS AND SALES
EACers are invited to submit their ads for inclusion in this column. Ads up to twelve lines are free.
ADS LARGER THAN 12 LINES MUST BE SUBMITTED CAMERA-READY OR AS ELECTRONIC
FILES, AND PAID IN ADVANCE. A full-page ad is $250. One-half page is $125. Discounts are available
for repeating ads. Ads should be limited to early American Coppers or tokens and books related to the
same. Deadline for material to appear in the January 2020 issue is December 28, 2019. All ads must
include the individual membership number of a current member in good standing. Copy should be sent
to the Editor, Harry E. Salyards, P.O. Box 1691, Hastings, NE 68902 or by email to hpsalyar@tcgcs.com.
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
Early American Coppers, Inc. publisher of Penny- Wise, does not examine any of the material advertised in
Penny- Wise, nor does it review any of the advertising therein. Early American Coppers, Inc. assumes no
responsibility or liability for any advertisement (or the material described therein) and no party shall have
recourse against Early American Coppers, Inc. All transactions arising from or relating to any advertise-
ment in Penny-Wise shall strictly be between the parties thereto.
* CK OK CK OK OK CK CK KK KK KK K OK
John D. Wright, EAC #7 1468 Timberlane Drive St. Joseph, MI 49085
The CENT Book 1816-1839. The standard reference on this series.
Big, clear pictures, full discussions, easy attribution.
Lists at $125 plus postage.
Special to EAC members at $100 postpaid. Please email us at theJohn@sbcglobal.net
kok KR Rk Kk KR Rk kK OK OR Ok
EARLY COPPERAUCTIONS
Bob Grellman, EAC #575 P.O. Box 17226 Amelia Island, FL 32035-3138 407-221-1654 (cell) email:
jrgrellman@gmail.com
Consignments for Auction: I am accepting early copper consignments for all Goldberg auctions. Call,
email, or text for details.
Late Date Large Cent Book: The Die Varieties of United States Large Cents 1840-1857 is no longer
available. Every known die variety and die state is fully described with additional rarity information for
rare die states. The book is hardbound with 464 pages and over 100 photos. Price was $100 postpaid. Au-
tographed on request. SOLD OUT. SORRY.
*K Ke KF KK OK KK K KK KK
A SMALL HOARD OF EAC COMMEMORATIVE MEDALS which has been off the market for well
over a decade will once again be offered to the general membership on a first-come, first-served basis!
Order yours now, as there 1s no telling how long this limited supply will last!
We still offer the 2000 Cape Canaveral Convention Commemorative, in copper, plain edge, larger than a
dollar. This obverse features the obverse of 1794. The reverse has the space shuttle soaring over the state
of Florida, with the legend EAC 2000 Cape Canaveral Florida April 6-9. Gem brilliant,flawles ssurfaces.
200
The medals are offered at $5.00 each, plus postage. ALL PROCEEDS TO EAC!! Please place all medal
orders, and/or inquire about available P-W issues: bimgander@gmail.com
Bim Gander, Membership Chair 12770 NW Steelhead Falls Drive Terrebonne, OR 97760
* OK KK K K K K K K K K K XK
An Interesting Selection of 18 Century British Tokens
Plus some Regal and Colonial Coins and a few Odds and Ends
Many tokens currently listed on our web site and inventory is updated frequently.
Please take a look — comments and commentary welcome.
Always in the market to buy—contact me at your convenience.
Gary Groll, EAC#4814 CTCC—EAC—C4—ANA
P.O. Box 717, Corvallis, OR 97339
443.223.0399 * info@garygroll.com * www.garygroll.com
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK KK OK
Charles Davis, EAC#142 Post OfficeBox 1 Wenham, Mass 01984
Sole distributor
Noyes: United States LargeCents 1793-1794 $125.00 + $8.00shipping
Noyes: United States LargeCents 1795-1797 $100.00 + $8.00 shipping
Noyes: United States Large Cents 1798-1814(2volumes) $200.00 + $10.00 shipping
Noyes: United States Large Cents 1793-1816(4volumes) $395.00 + $10.00 shipping
Noyes: United States Large Cents 1816-1857(2volumes) $225.00 + $10.00 shipping
Noyes: United States Large Cents 1793-1857(6volumes) $600.00 + $20.00shipping
* *K K *K K K K K K K K K XK
R. Craig Kammerer, E.A.C.#676 P.O.Box505 Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
RCraigK @optonline.net
Send for E-Mail [snail: LSSAE] extensive list of catalogs/books
E-mail your wants as I have most rare copper [& other series] sales catalogs/
books Breaking up huge library
* KF KK K K K K K K K K K XK
PROVENANCE GALLERY OF 1794 LARGE CENTS
Order your copy of the reference book featuring the most coveted and prolific date among the early United
States Large Cents. The book includes an overview of the formation of the US monetary system and the
first Philadelphia mint, as well as the production of what many consider the ultimate numismatic subject:
the Cents of 1794. It includes a brief history of large cent collecting and their collectors, descriptions of
collectible obverse & reverse designs, and colorful photographic plates of each coin featured in the 1794
Provenance Exhibit at the 2004 EAC Convention in San Diego. Prologue by John W. Adams. $45 post-
paid.
Al Boka, EAC #406 9817 Royal Lamb Drive Las Vegas, NV 89415
Tel: 702-809-2620 email: eac406@aol.com www.1794largecents.com
Kk Kk RK KR RK KR RR KR KR
201
Cotton Liners For Sale
For a limited time my wife has resumed making cotton liners for early copper storage. Rugged and high quality.
Liners are a combination of cotton and interfacing, white fabric with white stitching. They are a bit thicker and stiffer
than the ones Rod Burress used to sell. Prices are $45/100, or $25/50, plus exact shipping. Or you can send an SASE
for a sample. We currently have a small supply available for immediate shipping; otherwise, there is a small lead
time. Feel free to call or email for details.
* CK OK CK OK OK CK OK KK KK K K OK
Paul Langseth, EAC #2976 4645 N. Avenida del Cazador Tucson, AZ 85718
(480) 220-2056 plangseth93@hotmail.com
For Sale:
1830 N-9 Steel brown, rim worn into a few stars and parts of legends. EAC G4, PCGS G4.
$3895.
* KF K K K K K K K K K KK
Bill Eckberg, EAC #3395 PO Box 222338, West Palm Beach, FL 33422 703-577-7066
halfcent@mac.com
For Sale:
1797 C-2 PCGS VEF25 Attractive light brown, $3,000.
1803 C-3 PCGS AUS55 Lustrous brown with lighter brown highlights. EDS with slight bulge at date.
$3000.
1804 C-1 EF40. Lustrous brown AU with a few obverse nicks. Ex-Bill Weber, Superior 6/2002 #2293.
Breen plate coin. $2500
1809 C-4 MS60. Dark brown, VEDS with strong repunching on the 0. Extremely rare in UNC. Ex-Loye
Lauder Collection, Carvin Goodridge Goldbergs 2/2012 #254. $4,000.
1826 C-1 AUS50.Lustrous light steel color with nearly full cartwheel. $400
1828 C-1 PCGS MS63. A choice uncirculated example and extremely rare as such. $2000
* KCK K *K K K K K K K K KK
Ray Rouse, EAC #2675 7568 Regency Lake Drive —__ Boca Raton, FL 33433
(954) 234-6240 rayrpbfl@gmail.com
Wanted for Personal Collection:
1985 Boston Numismatic Society Medal.
Copper copies of Massachusetts’s silver coins as made by Edwin Bishop from Thomas Wyatt’s counter-
feit dies.
7 CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK OK
202
Michael S. Shutty, Jr., EAC #2790
If you want to read something totally different and a bit radical, I think you will enjoy my new book. It
is a heartfelt exploration of history as told by coins lost in the dirt. The book also explains how copper
cents decay when confronted with Mother Nature. Finally, I examine the aesthetics of corrosion, born of
the conflict between nature and man (wherein nature wins). Check it out & enjoy a great weekend read.
LOST CENTS, DEAD OWNERS: Appreciating Coins in Decay.
My book is available from Books123.org or from other Internet sellers like Amazon.com. It costs
$24.95 (less than a corroded Draped Bust cent).
* CK OK CK CK OK KK KK KK K KK
Mabel Ann Wright, EAC#78 1468 Timberlane Drive St.Joseph, MI 49085
We still have some copies of The CENT Book1816-1839.
Ask anybody who has one or has seen one--you want this book. We are selling what we have to EAC
members at $100 postpaid.
Please email us at theJohn@sbcglobal.net
* CK OK OK CK KK KK KK K KK K K OK
Craig McDonald, EAC #1540
Mahogany Coin Cabinets — Handcrafted from solid mahogany. Cabinets are available with either 12, 15,
or 18 trays. Multiple recess sizes up to 2” available. Custom cabinets also available...contact me to discuss
your needs. Cabinets start at $350, with free shipping for C4 and EAC members. For additional details,
information, images,or to order, visit:www.CabinetsByCraig.net (note that it’s net), or call 972- 978-7710,
or write: PO Box 1231, Frisco, TX75034.
* K K K K K K K K K K K XK
Wanted to buy: all bronze Presidential medals of the New York Numismatic Club and the Rochester Nu-
mismatic Association. Also, 1929 Howard Newcomb medal (California Coin Club).
Wanted to buy: Original 1890 Doughty signed (once owned) by Charles E. Moellering. Call me!
Chuck Heck, EAC #514 703 Village Green Ln, Bluffton, SC 29909 561-628-5345
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK Kk OK OK OK
203
British and Irish Tradesmen and their Copper Tokens of 1787 — 1804,
a book by Jon Lusk. (EAC #356) It has been fifty years since a book dedicated to the
subset of Dalton & Hamer tokens known as Tradesmen’ Tokens has been published. The
author of this work reveals discoveries concerning the issuers, their lives, names, and oc-
cupations. Tokens are pictured in large size, and in color, along with photographs of the
edges unwrapped into a straight line. Variety identification photographs and availability
ratings are included to assist the collector. Using inclusion criteria developed by the au-
thor, he suggests four collections of these tokens each containing from 110 to 248 pieces.
This book was written for collectors, or those interested in history. Better yet, it is meant
for those who are both. It 1s available from the author, Jon@Lusk.cc. (400 pages, hard-
bound, 8% x 11 -- $109, free shipping in US)
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK K KK OK
Tom Webster, EAC #5752 P.O. Box 465 Oshtemo, MI 49077
Wanted to Buy for my Personal Collection:
Hardcover EAC Convention Sale catalogs.
1794 S-68 latest die state example in grade range Good to Fine. Seeking examples with choice, smooth
surfaces, good color and no rim dings.
1796 Large Cents, seeking middle to end of CC range in choice, well stuck, good color, smooth surfaces,
with no rim dings. What do you have?
Connecticut copper coins with fatal or unusual die breaks. Seeking higher condition, full date, choice color
examples. What do you have?
Please contact me via email at webs1873@gmail.com ,or feel free to call my mobile phone number 269-
217-7700.
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK CK CK OK
Jim McGuigan, EAC #355 P.O. Box 133 N. Versailles, PA 15137
www.]immcguigan(@verizon.net (412) 247-4484
Numismatic Periodicals for Sale
I have over 1300 periodicals from many of the leading numismatic clubs and organizations for sale. Dating from
the 1970s to today, these periodicals contain thousands of articles dealing with all aspects of numismatics, including
coins, tokens, medals and paper money. Many of the articles contain original research and historical information
about their production and the people who collect them. The periodicals are from 16 different numismatic clubs,
including ANA, ANS, EAC, C4, JRCS, CSNS, FUN, MSNS, etc.
Price: 31250:
* OK OK OK KK KK Ke KK KK K KK OK
If your mailing address changes, be sure to notify the Treasurer promptly, as the United States
Postal Service does not forward copies of Penny-Wise.
204
New Half Cent Attribution Guide Makes identifying Half Cents easy.
Book was awarded EAC Book of the year 2016. Large photos with all attribution
points clearly illustrated. With each book ordered a quick finder
Small format guide is included. (a must have tool)
Soft spiral bound 8.5x11w/small guide— 54.95 + $3.95 shipping
Hard bound 8.5x11 w/small guide- #94.95 + $3.95 shipping
Leather bound 8.5x11 w/Small guide - $149.95 + $3.95 shipping
Michael Demling 1750 Zion Rd Suite 106A Northfield NJ 08225
EAC #781 mdemling@mdaarchitects.com
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK KK KK OK
Massachusetts Coppers Attribution Guide _ Just like the NJ Copper Guide this publication
covers both Mass Cents and Half Cent. 228 pages in 10 chapters outlining proven methods for easy
attribution. Also four chapters with large photos showing Obverse and Reverse die combinations for
both cent and half cents. Order yours today.
Soft bound 8.5x11—54.95+3.95 ship. Soft bound 5.5x6.75---39.95+3.95 ship. Both large and
small Soft bound special 89.95+4.95 ship. Hard bound 8.5x11---94.95+3.95 ship.
Michael Demling ~ 1750 Zion Rd. Suite 6A ~ Northfield, NJ 08225
EAC # 781 mdemling@mdaarchitects.com
* CK OK CK OK OK CK CK KK KK K K OK
Yl ™ CBE eo hy New Jersey Coppers Attribution Guide Makes identifying Jerseys easy.
&, pad. _ il “AN Unfortunately all SOLD OUT! But I do have a limited supply of the Leather
i apa sat 7) & Bound hard back copies . This is a beautiful tan leather, made with premium
‘QO ~~ wad paper. They originally sold for $149.95. Clearance price is $95 + $4 shipping.
3 Za ss 3 \ Se 4 Order one today before their all gone. Send Payment to:
i ——. Ss P. > ¥
aa Nee J Michael Demling~ 1750 Zion Rd Suite 106A Northfield NJ 08225
Xe, RTI yy EAC #781 mdemling@mdaarchitects.com
aE fil ea
* CK OK CK CK OK CK CK KK KK K KK OK
Al Nelson, EAC #5732
I am trying to upgrade my middle date collection. I am looking for the following varieties in VF30 or better:
1817 N15 1820 N4 1820 N6 1822 N1
1822 N7 1839 N4 1839 N5
Please call me at (847) 746-8510
* KCK KCK K K K KK K K K K KK
205
EAC AUCTION 2020
WE ARE NOW ACCEPTING CONSIGNMENTS
FOR THE MAY 2, 2020 EAC AUCTION
IN PITTSBURGH, PA
Vinton-McCawley Auctions
presen ts
ee i ee Ten
i
fe
é
fh DAYTON
a
= The
2019 EAC Convention Sale
Dayton, Ohio May 4, 2019
PLEASE SEND YOUR HIGH QUALITY CONSIGNMENTS TO:
KEVIN VINTON OR CHRIS MCCAWLEY
P.O. BOX 771 P.O. BOX 6400
DANBURY, CT 0068813-0771 AUSTIN, TX 78762
203-305-4710 405-226-5072
kevin@indeetlib.com cmccawley@aol.com
206
AN IMPORTANT NEW REFERENCE ON HALF CENTS
The Half Cent, 1793-1857: The Story of America’s Greatest Little Coin
The Half Gent, 1793-1857
~ > i? 2
dhe Story of DsNeslaetesits
Civeridaias Oieetem @reytel
“
~
<= William R: Eckberg
The story of the half cent from its antecedents and models through its first release in
1793 to its end in 1857 is told in this interesting and readable book.
Who made them? Why and when were they made? How many are known of each
variety? All of these questions and more are clearly addressed.
All obverses and reverses are illustrated in full color by 3.5” photos.
Lots of new information about the coins’ design, engraving and manufacture that
has been learned since the Cohen and Breen books of 35 years ago is included.
For advanced collectors and those new to early copper
Approximately 150 pages 8.5 x 11” hard-cover format.
Cover Price: $125.00. $95.00 to members of EAC, C4, ANA and NBS.
Contact the author for pricing on orders of 10 or more.
The deluxe edition of 10 bound in leather is SOLD OUT.
Only 500 copies will be printed, so it is sure to become a collector’s item.
Table of Contents and sample pages may be seen at http://www.halfcentbook.com.
Order at http://www.halfcentbook.com
or by contacting the author at halfcent@mac.com
or at PO Box 222338, West Palm Beach, FL 33422-2338
Bill Eckberg EAC #3395
207
- Which of these coins was the first struck in the New
World?
- Which of these were the first coins struck in what
would eventually become the United States?
- Benjamin Franklin designed which coin?
- Which is the first American coin to include the
famous motto, “e pluribus unum?”
Colonial
Coin
Collectors
If you are interested in the answers to
these questions or want to know more
about the coins on this page or colonial
era history, check out our website at:
www, colonialcoins.org
ar
J it :
= a a 1
=
q 7 S 1
i 2 a
“| love what | do and | take the covenant | make
with my clients seriously. As opposed to just doing
transactions, | am interested in forming an ongoing
collecting relationship with my new clients. Please
feel invited to contact me.
— Chris Victor McCawley
The McCawleys
\ CHRIS VICTOR MCCAWLEY een 2s eee. .
, * P.O. Box 6400 - Austin, TX 78762 « 512-297-2116 cmcawley@aol.com « ebay-friscomint1793 Oye -=
7K CK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK
Articles and letters published in Penny-Wise and the opinions and viewpoints expressed therein
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Early American Coppers, Inc.,
the Editor or any other official of the club. Penny-Wise reserves the right to edit all submissions for
length, clarity and accuracy.
Copyright of all articles published in Penny-Wise shall belong to Early American Coppers, Inc. Au-
thors sub- mitting material for publication warrant that the material submitted has not been pub-
lished before, except where the prior publication is cited and written permission has been granted
by the copyright holder. At the Editor’s discretion, permission may be granted to authors to re-use
material published in Penny-Wise. Any simultaneous submission to any other numismatic publica-
tion should likewise by noted with submission of the article, and approved by the Editor.
208
Rare Early American Coins — Early Copper Coins — Large Selections
Ierumgped bry Hievitig Aaacticess, HA. coms
1793 chain
1793 Wreath Vine Bars 1794 S-24 Apple Cheek
AU 58+ AU50 CAC
1793 Half Cent AU55 PCGS
$38,970
PCGS VF30 |
Bent Cap,Bnch Leaves
+ AE . _
1799 S-189 Cent, 1794 Ic S-72
———» at VF25 Important PCGS AU53 Head of 95
1793 Half Cent, $48,750 $18,400
PCGS VF 30 Bent, cap
$11,750
James Cottle Phone: 818-481-0569 + Jim@californiararecoins.com EAC # 6588
www.californiararecoins.com
EARLY AMERICAN COPPER
isn't just half cents and large cents
LAE)
x
ye re nae! | (iy sy si F
y Se ay N\\ ie JP ese” gt ,
TFN OZ
——— f,
—
1. =
a 45
‘4
:
¥
a)
_
American Historical Medals y z:
Colonial and Early American Coins Ss eles a i
World Coins That Circulated in Early America : : pens
And some large cents too BP VGt AE =s— se eae
John Kraljevich Americana
WWW.JKAMERICANA.COM
PO Box 1939 jk@jkamericana.com
Fort Mill, SC 29716 EAC 3208 since 1989 443.454.7588
PLATINUM NIGHT® & SIGNATURE® AUCTIONS
Sie lal0t-laVasiem ko M4040 mm @)at-lave(om mm MAY(-Mom@)alilate
ve 1=)(=1018 (0) alow alae) ane Walsw m1>)|(-\"46 (> Ore) | (=\eus(e)e
@)ais)aa\e man © lel e.O)nileit=| me) \ peel Om-\eleela
ac ope
Ce sn
ii TN
1794 Head of 1793 Cent, VF20
Biitsvece)audal- On hOlien mlal>simstn to) e)
1794 S-33 Head of 1794 Cent, VG7
The Famous Wheelspoke Variety
1794 S-39 Head of 1794 Cent, Fine 12
=> Gy AXe r= lan \VC=)avdism Ore) i (=\eil (ola
=*
a i a - 5
* Y ene +
= at
*Sreee eit"
1794 S-21 Head of 1794 Cent, XF40
Tied for the 10th Finest Flat Pole
“sy , Lt» hs oa
; : =
i
1794 S-35 Head of 1794 Cent, VG8
Tan) eXe)arlaya br-1k-mD)(-mo)t-lkom =.¢-100]8) (>
~ wal — "ay “fs 2
1794 S-A8 tarred Reverse Cent, VG7
Ex: Phillip Clover Collection
qa
ee
Poe eS
Ex: Daniel W. Holmes, Jr. Collection
Ay Cee ae ‘ :
oat ae : a al
Pe una Ww hla egg ae
4794 $-36 Head of 1794 Cent, Fine 12
Bi(sve Wie)audalsmNilaldam mlalscil
=>, Ol mia) \V(=) en Ore) | (=vert (ola)
1794 $251. Head of 1794 Cent, VF30
Tied for the Seventh Finest Known
Consignment deadline November 25.
(@Fo)a) t= (o1m= Mm (=lalt=\e(om @xe)al-s(e]alaal=\ai ee B)igovei ce) am celer-\"m Wol0]0lrototens 6101010 m
DALLAS | NEW YORK | BEVERLY HILLS | SAN FRANCISCO | CHICAGO | PALM BEACH
LONDON | PARIS | GENEVA | AMSTERDAM | HONG KONG
PANWWE- Wow aX erer=1 0) [are m@lur-liiava@xe)al-)(elalaal=/alesmla m0 pm @r-1K-1e [el ai-t)
Tanlaat-\elt-tk>m Or- lam avens-laler-\owaNe-Uit-vell=)
Heritage Numismatic Auctions, Inc. AB665, Currency Auctions of America AB2218 Paul R. Minshull #AU4563. aim Vil ikolapom @lalilatsw silere (=) ca Viclanlelcles
BP 20%; see HA.com. 52953
HERITAGE.
AUCTIONS
THE WORLD'S LARGEST
NUMISMATIC AUCTIONEER
Stacks Bowers Galleries is pleased to present
THE E PLURIBUS UNUM COLLECTION
OF NEW JERSEY COPPERS
The Finest Collection of New Jersey Coppers offered since Stack’s sale
of the John J. Ford Collection of New Jersey Coppers in 2003
Featuring 110 different New Jersey copper die marriages, including many rarities and more than 130 additional pieces including error
coins, rare overstrikes, die states, counterstamps, whatsits, pedigreed pieces, and St. Patrick (Mark Newby) farthings and halfpence.
1786 Maris 8.5-C. Rarity-8. No Coulter, 1786 Maris 16-J. Rarity-6-. 1786 Maris 18-M. Rarity-3. Bridle. 1786 Maris 21.5-R. Rarity-8.
Pattern Reverse. Fine-15 (PCGS). EF-40 (PCGS). AU-55 (PCGS). VG-8 (PCGS).
Ex Picker Collection.
Ex Picker, Taylor and O'Donnell Collections. Ex Hall, Brand and Bareford Collections.
1787 Maris 39-a. Rarity-2. 1787 Maris 44-c. Rarity-6+.
AU-50 (PCGS). Double Struck. AU-58 (PCGS). Sleigh Runner. VG-10 (PCGS).
1786 Maris 22-P. Rarity-7. No Coulter. 1787 Maris 27-S. Rarity-5-.
VF-20 (PCGS).
1788 Maris 49-f. Rarity-5. Head Left. 1787 Maris 53-j. Rarity-4. 1787 Maris 57-n. Rarity-6+. Camel 1787 Maris 68-w. Rarity-5.
EF-40 (PCGS). AU-55+ (PCGS). Head. Double Struck. Fine-12 (PCGS). AU-53+ (PCGS).
Ex Spiro Collection. Ex Spiro Collection. Ex Maris Collection and the
Maris Obverse Plate Coin. FEATURED IN THE
OFFICIAL AUCTION OF THE
WHITMAN COIN &
COLLECTIBLES EXPO
Baltimore, MD
November 13-16, 2019
For more information:
West Coast: 800.458.4646
1787 Maris 70-x. Rarity-7-. 1787 Maris 73-aa. Rarity-4. Plaited 1787 Maris 83-ii. Rarity-7-.
Plaited Mane. Fine Details (PCGS). Mane. Fine-15 (PCGS). Overstruck on a Very Fine Details (PCGS). East Coast: 800.566.2580
Overstruck. Spanish 4 Maravedis of Charles IV. Info@StacksBowers.com
LEGENDARY COLLECTIONS | LEGENDARY RESULTS | A LEGENDARY AUCTION FIRM
1231 E. Dyer Road, Suite 100, Santa Ana, CA 92705 « 949.253.0916
123 West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019 ¢ 212.582.2580 .
Info@StacksBowers.com e StacksBowers.com
California e New York e New Hampshire « Hong Kong « Paris
SBG PW NovEPluribus 190925
= GALLERIES
America’s Oldest and Most Accomplished Rare Coin Auctioneer
1797 $-121b Gripped
[AUCTIONEERS
ARE PROUD TO ANNOUNCE THE
FEBRUARY 16 , 2020 AUCTION
a
caturing
TheDouglas F. Bird Collectio
The Great Pacific Collection, The Nancy & Bryan Collection & ne Oli feutere
LARGE CENTS
Approvals to be announced later)
ae
== a | Ee
ef eas IAG ee
'Piieges® - a l
1795 S-76a 1796 3-103 LIHERTY 1797 S-120a Rev of 96
PCGS MS65BN PCGS MS65BN PCGS MS65BN
— =. x ae hie a . =a
rei = : a a
: Fi — i y
cA, a
1800/798 8-190 1801 S-219 3-Error Rev 1802 §-231 Stemless 1803 S-243 1807/6 S-272 Sm 7/6
PCGS MS65+BN NGC MS65RB PCGS MS63BN PCGS MS64+RB Stemless PCGS AU55
PCGS MS66RB
CAC Approved =
1807 5-276 LF
1810/09 5-281 1811/10 $-286 1871 N-? 1834 N-5
PCGS MS65RB PCGS MS65RB PCGS AUS58 PCGS MS64RD PCGS MS65RB
CAC Approved CAC Approved
HALF CENTS
Pu n Te guddtiie
i / SE of 1G’
1794 C-5b 1795 C-2b 1795 C-5b 1808/7 C-1
Only 3 Known PCGS XF45 PCGS AU55
1831 Original
PCGS XF40
ACCEPTING CONSIGNMENTS FOR ALL PRE-LONG BEACH AUCTIONS
CONTACT US FOR DETAILS 1-800-978-2646
CATALOGS AVAILABLE $15.00
DELUXE HARD BOUND CATALOGS AVAILABLE $125 (PRE-ORDER ONLY)
Copper Representative Bob Grellman 407-221-1654
yr members East Coast Representative Don Hosier 201-220-5793
SOyr members
AAW Ae lel(elel-leeletellat-MelelstMatsl00hciécbrsel- (oi RO) M Mig a) of a
LAA 838, LM 845 r <2
Ira & Larry Goldberg Coins & Collectibles, Inc. « 11400 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90064
310-551-2646 PH « 310-551-2626 FX « www.goldbergcoins.com «
goldbergcoins
hris V \ it. ———= - COLONIALS, HALF CENTS, AND LARGE CENTS
\ A S| |
*t, AS a !
pas” iGte lava Cette (e-bell @rejnjeler- me .. 7. HO! HO! HO!
: BY POPULAR REQUEST
Speci a list in OUR FIRST FIXED PRICE LIST
Early American Copper IN MANY A CHRISTMAS
Colonials
Half Cents - Large Cents
LE, : or? CVM / FRISCO MINT
Half Cents Large Cents
1793-1857 (1793-1796)
Large Cents Coronet Head Large
(1796-1814) Cents (1816-1839) Cents (1840-1857)
512-297-2116 or 405-226-5072 (cell)
cmccawley@aol.com_ ebay-friscomint1! 793
FIXED PRICE LIST
VAKYI Me) aa RY
www.earlycents.com
Chris Victor-McCawley YOU CAN PUT THIS TREE UNDER YOUR TREE!
P.O. Box 6400, Austin, TX 78762
TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY SEND YOUR ADDRESS TO:
CVM/FRISCO MINT
P.O. BOX 6400
AUSTIN, TX 78762
cmccawley@aol.com
Hi, I'm Lucas Baldridge and have recently started
iK working full time with my uncle "The Numismatic
NR | Godfather" aka Chris McCawley. You can like our
Chris McCawley | Facebook page under Early Cents and stay up to date
& Lucas Baldridge on our latest show schedule. You can also view our
| Sy /. re frequently updated new purchases on our website at
; MEMBER :
Qe Member earlycents.com. I am excited to be here learning and
as P-N'G Early was Coppers working towards our future numismatic endeavors.
Professional NumMisMatisTs GUILD
1 MIN
FRISCOMINT.COM
Your #1 choice in the finest quality and widest
selection of Early American Colonials, Half
Cents, and Large Cents on Ebay. Over 2000 early
coppers listed with both raw and top tier 3rd party
graded coins available, new inventory added daily.
Weekly, no reserve, $.99 cent auctions. Flexible and
committed to building the collection YOU want,
new or experienced numismatists alike. Contact us
through Ebay, E-mail, or call us directly and we’ll
help find what you’re looking for.
FRISCOMINT1 7/93
Di ler- Tom by-Nelucelexem- nave!
Travis Hollon, Proprietors
C# 972-310-9497
214-912-6644
friscomint@ live.com
www.ebay.com/str/friscomint
Recreation of Henry Voigt’s 1793 Liberty Cap device punch.
©2019, Early American Coppers, Inc.
Unauthorized use prohibited.
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11